Environmental ProtectionEnvironmental Protection AgencyRULESDeferment of Sanctions:California; San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District,45199-452002011-18992PROPOSED RULESRevisions to State Implementation Plans:California; San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District,45212-452152011-18991NOTICESMeetings:Mid-Atlantic/Northeast Visibility Union Executive Board,452532011-19137Public Water Supply Supervision Program:Program Revision for State of Alaska,45253-452542011-19123Executive Office of the PresidentSee

HUD is moving its regulation implementing the governmentwide common rule on drug-free workplace requirements for financial assistance from one title in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) to another title. This relocation of the requirements from one CFR title to another responds to directions from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to all federal agencies to consolidate into one CFR title all federal regulations on drug-free workplace requirements for financial assistance. These changes constitute an administrative simplification and make no substantive change in HUD policy or procedures for drug-free workplace.

DATES:

Effective Date:August 29, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Barbara Dorf, Director, Office of Departmental Grants Management and Oversight, Office of the Chief of the Human Capital Officer, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Room 3156, Washington, DC 20410-0500, telephone number 202-708-0667. (This is not a toll-free number). Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

The Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988 (Pub. L. 100-690, Title V, Subtitle D) (41 U.S.C. 701et seq.) (the Act) was enacted on November 18, 1988, as part of the 1988 Omnibus Drug Act. The Act requires that recipients of grants and parties to cooperative agreements provide a drug-free workplace. On January 31, 1989 (53 FR 4946), the federal agencies issued an interim final common rule to implement the Act as it applies to grants. On May 25, 1990 (55 FR 21681), after considering public comment, the federal agencies issued a final common rule.

On January 23, 2002 (67 FR 3266), the federal agencies proposed substantive changes to the governmentwide Debarment and Suspension (Nonprocurement) and governmentwide Requirements for Drug-Free Workplace (Grants) common rule. HUD did not join in the January 23, 2002, publication, but proposed adopting the common rule amendments by separate rule, that was published on July 22, 2002 (67 FR 48006). On November 26, 2003 (68 FR 66534), after considering public comment on the January 23, 2002, common rule and, after HUD considered public comment on its July 22, 2002, proposed rule, the federal agencies, including HUD, published a final rule that updated the common rule on drug-free workplace requirements. Each agency at that time also relocated its drug-free workplace common rule to its own CFR part and removed the drug-free workplace rule from a subpart in the debarment and suspension common rule. HUD's drug-free workplace common rule was moved to 24 CFR part 21.

On May 11, 2004 (69 FR 26276), OMB established Title 2 of the CFR as the new, central location for OMB guidance and agency implementing regulations concerning grants and cooperative agreements. With the establishment of Title 2 of the CFR, OMB announced its intention to replace agencies' common rules with a single set of drug-free workplace requirements, policies, and procedures, referred to as OMB guidance. Through this approach, rather than have each agency issue identical or nearly identical rules based on the common rule, agencies would adopt the OMB guidance through brief regulations that reference the agencies' adoption of the guidance. The establishment of Title 2 of the CFR is intended to assist recipients that do business with multiple federal agencies by creating one title in which recipients can find the agencies' regulations implementing governmentwide requirements governing grants and cooperative agreements that were previously published under many separate CFR titles. OMB began the process of replacing common rules with its guidance by proposing, and later finalizing, governmentwide guidance on nonprocurement suspension and debarment enforcement actions in 2 CFR part 180.

On September 26, 2008 (73 FR 55776), OMB proposed guidance for drug-free workplace requirements in a new CFR part—2 CFR part 182. In addition to proposing the guidance for drug-free workplace requirements, OMB also proposed the format and organizational structure of the requirements that agencies should adopt. The guidance was issued in final form on June 15, 2009 (74 FR 28149). The final guidance directs that each federal agency replace the common rule on drug-free workplace requirements, which the agency previously issued in its own CFR title, with a brief regulation in 2 CFR adopting the governmentwide drug-free workplace policies and procedures.

II. This Final Rule

As the OMB guidance requires, HUD is taking two regulatory actions by this final rule. First, HUD is removing the OMB common rule on drug-free workplace requirements which includes some revisions particular to HUD that are currently codified at 24 CFR part 21. Second, to replace the common rule, HUD is promulgating a new regulation at 2 CFR part 2429 to adopt the governmentwide policies and procedures on drug-free workplaces that are now in the OMB guidance. This rule does not make any substantive changes in the governmentwide drug-free workplace policies and procedures, but rather simply relocates HUD's drug-free workplace requirements to a central location in 2 CFR 2429, and highlights the commonality of these requirements among federal agencies by cross-referencing to OMB's guidance.

III. Findings and CertificationsJustification for Final Rule

HUD generally publishes regulatory changes for public comment before issuing them for effect, in accordance with its own regulations on rulemaking in 24 CFR part 10. HUD does provide, however, in § 10.1 for exceptions from that general rule where the Department finds good cause to omit advance notice and public participation. The good cause requirement is satisfied when the prior public procedure is “impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” In this case, the Department finds that delaying the effective date of this rule in order to solicit prior public comment is unnecessary.

As described in the “Background” section of this preamble, this rule is directed to a CFR “housekeeping” matter which is moving HUD's governmentwide regulations applicable to drug-free workplace requirements to a new title in the CFR and in streamlined form, as directed by OMB. This rule makes no substantive changes to the drug-free workplace policies and procedures, as currently codified in regulation, and which have been proposed for comment three times and adopted after resolution of the comments received. Since no substantive changes are made by this rule, and the rule would not affect current application and enforcement of drug-free workplace requirements, no public comment is necessary.

Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review

This rule is not a significant regulatory action under section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and Review, and it was not reviewed by OMB. The rule responds to OMB's streamlining direction with respect to drug-free workplace requirements for federal financial assistance, and adds HUD's requirements to those of other federal agencies that are consolidated in one title of the CFR. This rule is solely an administrative simplification that

Regulatory Flexibility Act

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601et seq.) generally requires an agency to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to notice and comment rulemaking requirements, unless the agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Because no advance notice of proposed rulemaking is required pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b) for this rule, which moves a set of regulations, without change, from one CFR title to another, the provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act do not apply.

Environmental Impact

This rule is categorically excluded from environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321) and HUD regulations at 24 CFR 50.19(c)(1).

Executive Order 13132, Federalism

Executive Order 13132 (entitled “Federalism”) prohibits an agency from publishing any rule that has federalism implications if the rule imposes substantial direct compliance costs on state and local governments and is not required by statute, or the rule preempts state law, unless the agency meets the relevant requirements of section 6 of the Executive Order. This final rule does not have federalism implications and does not impose substantial direct compliance costs on state and local governments or preempt state law within the meaning of the Executive Order.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) (12 U.S.C. 1531-1538) establishes requirements for federal agencies to assess the effects of their regulatory actions on state, local, and tribal governments, and on the private sector. This final rule would not impose any federal mandates on any state, local, or tribal governments, or on the private sector, within the meaning of UMRA.

Aged, Community development block grants, Grant programs—housing and community development, Grant programs—Indians, Indians, Individuals with disabilities, Public housing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

Accordingly, for the reasons described in the preamble, and under the authority of 5 U.S.C. 301, HUD amends the Code of Federal Regulation, Title 2, Subtitle B, chapter XXIV, and Title 24 CFR parts 5, 21, 84 and 1000, as follows:

Title 2—Grants and Agreements1. Add new part 2429 in Subtitle B, Chapter XXIV, to read as follows:PART 2429—REQUIREMENTS FOR DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE (FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE)Sec.2429.10What does this part do?2429.20Does this part apply to me?2429.30What policies and procedures must I follow?Subpart A—[Reserved]Subpart B—Requirements for Recipients Other Than Individuals2429.225Whom in HUD does a recipient other than an individual notify about a criminal drug conviction?Subpart C—Requirements for Recipients Who Are Individuals2429.300Whom in HUD does a recipient who is an individual notify about a criminal drug conviction?Subpart D—Responsibilities of Agency Awarding Officials2429.400What method do I use as an agency awarding official to obtain a recipient's agreement to comply with the OMB guidance?Subpart E—Violations of This Part and Consequences2429.500Who in HUD determines that a recipient other than an individual violated the requirements of this part?2429.505Who in HUD determines that a recipient who is an individual violated the requirements of this part?Subpart F—[Reserved]Authority:

41 U.S.C. 701-707; 42 U.S.C. 3535(d).

§ 2429.10What does this part do?

This part requires that the award and administration of HUD grants and cooperative agreements comply with Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance implementing the portion of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988 (41 U.S.C. 701-707) (referred to as the Act in this part) that applies to grants. This part:

(a) Gives regulatory effect to the OMB guidance (Subparts A through F of 2 CFR part 182) for HUD grants and cooperative agreements; and

(b) Establishes HUD policies and procedures for compliance with the Act that are the same as those of other Federal agencies, in conformance with the requirement in 41 U.S.C. 705 for governmentwide implementing regulations.

§ 2429.20Does this part apply to me?

This part, and through this part, pertinent portions of the OMB guidance in subparts A through F of 2 CFR part 182 (see table at 2 CFR 182.115(b)) apply to you if you are a:

(a) Recipient of a HUD grant or cooperative agreement; or

(b) HUD awarding official.

§ 2429.30What policies and procedures must I follow?

(a)General.You must follow the policies and procedures specified in applicable sections of the OMB guidance in Subparts A through F of 2 CFR part 182, as implemented by this part.

(b)Specific sections of OMB guidance that this part supplements.In implementing the OMB guidance in 2 CFR part 182, this part supplements four sections of the guidance, as shown in the following table. For each of those sections, you must follow the policies and procedures of the OMB guidance, as supplemented by this part.

Section of OMB guidanceSection in this

part where

supplemented

What the supplementation clarifies(1) 2 CFR 182.225(a)§ 2429.225Whom in HUD must a recipient other than an individual notify if an employee is convicted for a violation of a criminal drug statute in the workplace?(2) 2 CFR 182.300(b)§ 2429.300Whom in HUD must a recipient who is an individual notify if he or she is convicted of a criminal drug offense resulting from a violation occurring during the conduct of any award activity?(3) 2 CFR 182.500§ 2429.500Who in HUD is authorized to determine that a recipient other than an individual is in violation of the requirements of 2 CFR part 182, as implemented by this part?(4) 2 CFR 182.505§ 2429.505Who in HUD is authorized to determine that a recipient who is an individual is in violation of the requirements of 2 CFR part 182, as implemented by this part?

(c)Sections of the OMB guidance that this part does not supplement.For any section of OMB guidance in Subparts A through F of 2 CFR part 182 that is not listed in paragraph (b) of this section, HUD policies and procedures are the same as those in the OMB guidance.

Subpart A—[Reserved]Subpart B—Requirements for Recipients Other Than Individuals§ 2429.225Whom in HUD does a recipient other than an individual notify about a criminal conviction?

A recipient other than an individual who is required under 2 CFR 182.225(a) to notify Federal agencies about an employee's conviction for a criminal drug offense must notify each HUD office with which it currently has an award.

Subpart C—Requirements for Recipients Who Are Individuals§ 2429.300Whom in HUD does a recipient who is an individual notify about a criminal conviction?

A recipient who is an individual and is required under 2 CFR 182.300(b) to notify Federal agencies about a conviction for a criminal drug offense must notify each HUD office with which he or she currently has an award.

Subpart D—Responsibilities of Agency Awarding Officials§ 2429.400What method do I use as an agency awarding official to obtain a recipient's agreement to comply with the OMB guidance?

To obtain a recipient's agreement to comply with applicable requirements in the OMB guidance at 2 CFR part 182, you must include the following term or condition in the award:

Drug-free workplace.You as the recipient must comply with drug-free workplace requirements in Subpart B (or Subpart C, if the recipient is an individual) of part 2429, which adopts the governmentwide implementation (2 CFR part 182) of sections 5152-5158 of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988 (Pub. L. 100-690, Title V, Subtitle D; 41 U.S.C. 701-707).

Subpart E—Violations of This Part and Consequences§ 2429.500Who in HUD determines that a recipient other than an individual violated the requirements of this part?

The Secretary or designee is the official authorized to make the determination under 2 CFR 182.500.

§ 2429.505Who in HUD determines that a recipient who is an individual violated the requirements of this part?

The Secretary or designee is the official authorized to make the determination under 2 CFR 182.505.

Subpart F—[Reserved]Title 24—Housing and Urban DevelopmentPART 5—GENERAL HUD PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS; WAIVERS2. The authority citation for part 5 continues to read as follows:Authority:

The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (“CFPB” or “Bureau”), pursuant to the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010, is adopting its Rules Relating to Investigations in order to describe the Bureau's procedures for investigations pursuant to section 1052 of the Act. The Bureau invites interested members of the public to submit written comments to this interim final rule setting forth those rules.

DATES:

This interim final rule is effective on July 28, 2011. Written comments must be received on or before September 26, 2011.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments, identified byDocket No. CFPB-2011-0007,by any of the following methods:

All submissions must include the agency name and docket number or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this rulemaking. In general, all comments received will be posted without change tohttp://www.regulations.gov.In addition, comments will be available for public inspection and copying at 1801 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time. You can make an appointment to inspect the documents by telephoning (202) 435-7275.

All comments, including attachments and other supporting materials, will become part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. Sensitive personal information, such as account numbers or social security numbers, should not be included. Comments will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact information.

The Bureau is adopting Rules Relating to Investigations (“Rules”) that implement provisions of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (“Act”)1that relate to the Bureau's investigations. Specifically, these Rules will govern investigations undertaken pursuant to section 1052 of the Act, 12 U.S.C. 5562, which authorizes the Bureau to investigate whether persons have engaged in conduct that violates any provision of Federal consumer financial law.

1The Act is Title X of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, as amended, Public Law 111-203 (July 21, 2010), Title X, 12 U.S.C. 5481et seq.Section 1066 of the Act grants the Secretary of the Treasury interim authority to perform certain functions of the CFPB. Pursuant to that authority, Treasury publishes these Rules on behalf of the CFPB.

In developing these Rules, the Bureau considered the investigative procedures of other law enforcement agencies. Specifically, the Bureau reviewed the procedures currently used by the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”), the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), and the prudential regulators for guidance. In light of the similarities between section 1052 of the Act and section 20 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”), 15 U.S.C. 41et seq.,the Bureau drew most heavily from the FTC's nonadjudicative procedures in constructing the Rules.

The Rules describe a number of Bureau policies and procedures that apply in a nonadjudicative setting. Among other things, these Rules set forth (1) the Bureau's authority to conduct investigations, and (2) the rights of persons from whom the Bureau seeks to compel information in investigations.

In particular, the Rules lay out the Bureau's authority to conduct investigations before instituting judicial or administrative adjudicatory proceedings under Federal consumer financial law. The Rules authorize the Assistant Director of the Division of Enforcement to issue civil investigative demands for documentary material, tangible things, written reports or answers to questions, and oral testimony, which may be enforced in district court by either the General Counsel or the Assistant Director of the Division of Enforcement. The Rules also detail the authority of the Bureau's investigators to conduct investigations and hold investigational hearings pursuant to civil investigative demands for oral testimony.

Furthermore, the Rules set forth the rights of persons from whom the Bureau seeks to compel information in an investigation. Specifically, the Rules describe how such persons should be notified of the purpose of the Bureau's investigation. The Rules detail the procedures for filing a petition for an order modifying or setting aside a civil investigative demand, which will be ruled upon by the Bureau Director. They also describe the process for obtaining copies of or access to documents or testimony provided to the Bureau. In addition, the Rules describe a person's right to counsel at investigational hearings.

(b) Section-by-Section SummarySection 1080.1Scope

This section describes the scope of the Rules. It makes clear that these Rules only apply to investigations under section 1052 of the Act.

Section 1080.2Definitions

This section defines several terms used throughout the Rules. Many of these definitions also may be found in section 1051 of the Act.

Section 1080.3Policy as to Private Controversies

This section states the Bureau's policy of pursuing investigations that are in the public interest. Section 1080.3 is consistent with the Bureau's mission to protect consumers by investigating potential violations of Federal consumer financial law.

Section 1080.4By Whom Conducted

This section explains that Bureau investigators are authorized to conduct investigations pursuant to section 1052 of the Act.

Section 1080.5Notification of Purpose

This section provides that a person compelled to provide information to the Bureau or testify in an investigational hearing must be advised of the nature of the conduct constituting the alleged violation under investigation and the applicable provisions of law. This section implements the requirements for civil investigative demands described in section 1052(c)(2) of the Act.

Section 1080.6Civil Investigative Demands

This section lays out the Bureau's procedures for issuing civil investigative demands. It authorizes the Assistant Director of the Division of Enforcement to issue civil investigative demands for documentary material, tangible things, written reports or answers to questions, and oral testimony. This section details the information that must be included in civil investigative demands and the requirement that responses be made under a sworn certificate. Section 1080.6 also authorizes the Assistant Director of the Division of Enforcement to negotiate and approve the terms of compliance with civil investigative demands and grant extensions for good cause. Finally, this section describes the procedures for seeking an order to modify or set aside a civil investigative demand, which will be ruled upon by the Bureau Director.

Section 1080.7Investigational Hearings

This section describes the procedures for investigational hearings initiated pursuant to a civil investigative demand for oral testimony. It also lays out the roles and responsibilities of the Bureau investigator conducting the investigational hearing, which include excluding unauthorized persons from the hearing room and ensuring that the investigational hearing is transcribed, the witness is duly sworn, the transcript is a true record of the testimony, and the transcript is provided to the designated custodian.

Section 1080.8Withholding Requested Material

This section describes the procedures that apply when persons withhold material responsive to a civil investigative demand. It requires that they assert a privilege by the production date and, if so directed in the civil investigative demand, also submit a detailed schedule of the items withheld. Section 1080.8 also sets forth the procedures for handling the disclosure of privileged or protected information or communications.

Section 1080.9Rights of Witnesses in Investigations

This section describes the rights of persons compelled to submit information or provide testimony in an investigation. It details the procedures for obtaining a copy of submitted documents or a copy of or access to a transcript of the person's testimony. This section also describes a witness's right to make changes to his or her transcript and the rules for signing the transcript.

Section 1080.9 lays out a person's right to counsel at an investigational hearing and describes his or her counsel's right to advise the witness as to any question posed for which an objection may properly be made. It also describes the witness's or counsel's rights to object to questions or requests that the witness is privileged to refuse to answer. This section states that counsel for the witness may not otherwise object to questions or interrupt the examination to make statements on the record but may request that the witness have an opportunity to clarify any of his or her answers. Finally, this section authorizes the Bureau investigator to take all necessary action during the course of the hearing to avoid delay and to prevent or restrain disorderly, dilatory, obstructionist, or contumacious conduct, or contemptuous language.

Section 1080.10Noncompliance With Civil Investigative Demands

This section authorizes the Assistant Director of the Division of Enforcement, the General Counsel, or their delegees, to initiate an action to enforce a civil investigative demand in connection with the failure or refusal of a person to comply with, or to obey, a civil investigative demand. In addition, they are authorized to seek civil contempt or other appropriate relief in cases where a court order enforcing a civil investigative demand has been violated.

Section 1080.11Disposition

This section explains that an enforcement action may be instituted in federal or state court or through administrative proceedings when warranted by the facts disclosed by an investigation. This section further provides that the Bureau may refer investigations to appropriate federal, state, or foreign government agencies as appropriate. It also authorizes the Assistant Director of the Division of Enforcement to close the investigation when the facts of an investigation indicate an enforcement action is not necessary or warranted in the public interest.

Section 1080.12Orders Requiring Witnesses To Testify or Provide Other Information and Granting Immunity

This section authorizes the Assistant Director of the Division of Enforcement to request approval from the Attorney General for the issuance of an order requiring a witness to testify or provide other information and granting immunity under 18 U.S.C. 6004. It also sets forth the Bureau's right to review the exercise of these functions, and states that the Bureau will entertain an appeal from an order requiring a witness to testify or provide other information only upon a showing that a substantial question is involved, the determination of which is essential to serve the interests of justice. Finally, this section describes the applicable rules and time limits for such appeals.

Section 1080.13Custodians

This section describes the procedures for designating a custodian and deputy custodian for material produced pursuant to a civil investigative demand in an investigation. It also states that these materials are for the official use of the Bureau, but, upon notice to the custodian, must be made available for examination during regular office hours by the person who produced them.

Section 1080.14 explains that documentary materials and tangible things obtained by the Bureau pursuant to a civil investigative demand are subject to the requirements and procedures relating to disclosure of records and information in part 1070 of this title. This section also states that investigations generally are non-public. A Bureau investigator may disclose the existence of an investigation to the extent necessary to advance the investigation.

(c) Procedural Requirements(1) Regulatory Requirements

The Rules relate solely to agency procedure and practice and, thus, are not subject to the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 551et seq.Although the Rules are exempt from these requirements, the Bureau invites comment on them. Because no notice of proposed rulemaking is required, the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601(2) do not apply.

(2) Section 1022(b)(2) Provisions

The CFPB has conducted an analysis of benefits, costs, and impacts2and consulted with the prudential regulators, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Department of Justice, and the Federal Trade Commission, including with respect to whether the Rules are consistent with any relevant prudential, market, and systemic objectives administered by such agencies.3

2Section 1022(b)(2)(A) addresses the consideration of the potential benefits and costs of regulation to consumers and industry, including the potential reduction of access by consumers to consumer financial products or services; the impact of proposed rules on depository institutions and credit unions with $10 billion or less in total assets as described in Section 1026 of the Dodd-Frank Act; and the impact on consumers in rural areas.

3The President's July 11, 2011, Executive Order 13579 entitled “Regulation and Independent Regulatory Agencies,” asks the independent agencies to follow the cost-saving, burden-reducing principles in Executive Order 13563; harmonization and simplification of rules; flexible approaches that reduce costs; and scientific integrity. In the spirit of Executive Order 13563, the CFPB has consulted with the Office of Management and Budget regarding this interim final rule.

The Bureau concludes that, on balance, the Rules are beneficial to consumers and covered persons alike. The Rules do not impose any obligations on consumers or have any direct impact on their access to credit. Conversely, they provide a clear, efficient mechanism for investigating compliance with the Federal consumer financial laws, which benefits consumers because the Rules offer a systematic process for protecting them from unlawful behavior.

The Rules impose certain obligations on covered persons who receive civil investigative demands in Bureau investigations. Specifically, as described above, the Rules set forth the process for complying with or objecting to civil investigative demands for documentary material, tangible things, written reports or answers to questions, and oral testimony. The obligations in the Rules stem from express language in the Act. As such, the Rules do not impose additional burdens on covered persons beyond those Congress imposed in the Act. In fact, the Rules implement the statutory requirements and provide clear guidelines to recipients of civil investigative demands, providing a level of clarity and certainty that is beneficial to those obligated under the Act to comply with such demands. Moreover, ensuring compliance with Federal consumer financial law ultimately benefits covered persons by ensuring that scrupulous actors are not competitively disadvantaged in the marketplace.

Furthermore, because section 1052 of the Act and the Rules are largely based on section 20 of the FTC Act and its corresponding regulations, they present an existing, stable model of investigatory procedures that should not impose new compliance costs. The entities subject to the Bureau's jurisdiction are accustomed to complying with these or similar procedures for responding to demands for information or testimony from regulators. Thus, they do not face a significant cost of adjusting to a new procedural landscape for investigations; rather, they benefit from the Bureau's adoption of an existing model.

The Rules contemplate that the Bureau will exercise its discretion to modify demands or extend the time for compliance for good cause. The Bureau can assess the cost of compliance with a civil investigative demand in a particular circumstance and take appropriate steps to mitigate any unreasonable compliance burden, a process providing flexibility that benefits covered persons.

Further, the Rules have no unique impact on insured depository institutions or insured credit unions with less than $10 billion in assets described in section 1026(a) of the Act, and do not have a unique impact on rural consumers.

Assistant Director of the Division of Enforcementmeans the head of the Division of Enforcement or any Bureau employee to whom the Assistant Director of the Division of Enforcement has delegated authority to act under this part.

Bureaumeans the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.

Bureau investigationmeans any inquiry conducted by a Bureau investigator for the purpose of ascertaining whether any person is or has been engaged in any conduct that is a violation.

Bureau investigatormeans any attorney or investigator employed by theBureau who is charged with the duty of enforcing or carrying into effect any Federal consumer financial law.

Custodianmeans the custodian or any deputy custodian designated by the Bureau for the purpose of maintaining custody of information produced pursuant to this part.

Directormeans the Director of the Bureau or a person authorized to perform the functions of the Director in accordance with the law.

Division of Enforcementmeans the division of the Bureau responsible for enforcement of Federal consumer financial law.

Documentary materialmeans the original or any copy of any book, document, record, report, memorandum, paper, communication, tabulation, chart, logs, electronic files, or other data or data compilations stored in any medium, including electronically-stored information.

Electronically stored information (ESI)means any information stored in any electronic medium from which information can be obtained either directly or, if necessary, after translation by the responding party into a reasonably usable form.

General Counselmeans the General Counsel of the Bureau or any Bureau employee to whom the General Counsel has delegated authority to act under this part.

Violationmeans any act or omission that, if proved, would constitute a violation of any provision of Federal consumer financial law.

§ 1080.3Policy as to private controversies.

The Bureau shall act only in the public interest and will not initiate an investigation or take other enforcement action when the alleged violation is merely a matter of private controversy and does not tend to affect adversely the public interest.

§ 1080.4By whom conducted.

Bureau investigations are conducted by Bureau investigators designated and duly authorized under section 1052 of the Act, 12 U.S.C. 5562, to conduct such investigations.

§ 1080.5Notification of purpose.

Any person compelled to furnish documentary material, tangible things, written reports or answers to questions, oral testimony, or any combination of such material, answers, or testimony to the Bureau shall be advised of the nature of the conduct constituting the alleged violation that is under investigation and the provisions of law applicable to such violation.

§ 1080.6Civil investigative demands.

(a)In general.In accordance with section 1052(c) of the Act, the Assistant Director of the Division of Enforcement may issue a civil investigative demand in any Bureau investigation directing the person named therein to produce documentary material for inspection and copying or reproduction in the form or medium requested by the Bureau; to submit tangible things; to provide a written report or answers to questions; to appear before a designated representative at a designated time and place to testify about documentary material, tangible things, or other information; and to furnish any combination of such material, things, answers, or testimony.

(1)Documentary material.

(i) Civil investigative demands for the production of documentary material shall describe each class of material to be produced with such definiteness and certainty as to permit such material to be fairly identified, prescribe a return date or dates that will provide a reasonable period of time within which the material so demanded may be assembled and made available for inspection and copying or reproduction, and identify the custodian to whom such material shall be made available. Documentary material for which a civil investigative demand has been issued shall be made available as prescribed in the civil investigative demand.

(ii) Production of documentary material in response to a civil investigative demand shall be made under a sworn certificate, in such form as the demand designates, by the person to whom the demand is directed or, if not a natural person, by any person having knowledge of the facts and circumstances relating to such production, to the effect that all of the documentary material required by the demand and in the possession, custody, or control of the person to whom the demand is directed has been produced and made available to the custodian.

(2)Tangible things.

(i) Civil investigative demands for tangible things shall describe each class of tangible things to be produced with such definiteness and certainty as to permit such things to be fairly identified, prescribe a return date or dates which will provide a reasonable period of time within which the things so demanded may be assembled and submitted, and identify the custodian to whom such things shall be submitted.

(ii) Submissions of tangible things in response to a civil investigative demand shall be made under a sworn certificate, in such form as the demand designates, by the person to whom the demand is directed or, if not a natural person, by any person having knowledge of the facts and circumstances relating to such production, to the effect that all of the tangible things required by the demand and in the possession, custody, or control of the person to whom the demand is directed have been submitted to the custodian.

(3)Written reports or answers to questions.

(i) Civil investigative demands for written reports or answers to questions shall propound with definiteness and certainty the reports to be produced or the questions to be answered, prescribe a date or dates at which time written reports or answers to questions shall be submitted, and identify the custodian to whom such reports or answers shall be submitted.

(ii) Each reporting requirement or question in a civil investigative demand shall be answered separately and fully in writing under oath. Responses to a civil investigative demand for a written report or answers to questions shall be made under a sworn certificate, in such form as the demand designates, by the person to whom the demand is directed or, if not a natural person, by any person responsible for answering each reporting requirement or question, to the effect that all of the information required by the demand and in the possession, custody, control, or knowledge of the person to whom the demand is directed has been submitted to the custodian.

(4)Oral testimony.

(i) Civil investigative demands for the giving of oral testimony shall prescribe a date, time, and place at which oral testimony shall be commenced, and identify a Bureau investigator who shall conduct the investigation and the custodian to whom the transcript of such investigation shall be submitted. Oral testimony in response to a civil investigative demand shall be taken in accordance with the procedures for investigational hearings prescribed by §§ 1080.7 and 1080.9 of this part.

(ii) Where a civil investigative demand requires oral testimony from an entity, the civil investigative demand shall describe with reasonable particularity the matters for examination and the entity must designate one or more officers, directors, or managing agents, or designate other persons who consent to testify on its behalf. Unlessa single individual is designated by the entity, the entity must designate the matters on which each designee will testify. The individuals designated must testify about information known or reasonably available to the entity and their testimony shall be binding on the entity.

(b)Manner and form of production of ESI.When a civil investigative demand requires the production of ESI, it shall be produced in accordance with the instructions provided by the Bureau regarding the manner and form of production. Absent any instructions as to the form for producing ESI, ESI must be produced in the form in which it is ordinarily maintained or in a reasonably usable form.

(c)Compliance.The Assistant Director of the Division of Enforcement is authorized to negotiate and approve the terms of satisfactory compliance with civil investigative demands and, for good cause shown, may extend the time prescribed for compliance.

(d)Petition for order modifying or setting aside demand—in general.Any petition for an order modifying or setting aside a civil investigative demand shall be filed with the Executive Secretary of the Bureau with a copy to the Assistant Director of the Division of Enforcement within twenty (20) days after service of the civil investigative demand, or, if the return date is less than twenty (20) days after service, prior to the return date. Such petition shall set forth all assertions of privilege or other factual and legal objections to the civil investigative demand, including all appropriate arguments, affidavits, and other supporting documentation. The attorney who objects to a demand must sign any objections.

(1)Statement.Each petition shall be accompanied by a signed statement representing that counsel for the petitioner has conferred with counsel for the Bureau in a good-faith effort to resolve by agreement the issues raised by the petition and has been unable to reach such an agreement. If some of the matters in controversy have been resolved by agreement, the statement shall specify the matters so resolved and the matters remaining unresolved. The statement shall recite the date, time, and place of each such conference between counsel, and the names of all parties participating in each such conference.

(2)Extensions of time.The Assistant Director of the Division of Enforcement is authorized to rule upon requests for extensions of time within which to file such petitions. Requests for extension of time are disfavored.

(3)Disposition.The Director has the authority to rule upon a petition for an order modifying or setting aside a civil investigative demand.

(e)Stay of compliance period.The timely filing of a petition for an order modifying or setting aside a civil investigative demand shall stay the time permitted for compliance with the portion challenged. If the petition is denied in whole or in part, the ruling will specify a new return date.

(f)Public disclosure.All such petitions and the responses thereto are part of the public records of the Bureau unless the Bureau determines otherwise for good cause shown.

§ 1080.7Investigational hearings.

(a) Investigational hearings, as distinguished from hearings in adjudicative proceedings, may be conducted pursuant to a civil investigative demand for the giving of oral testimony in the course of any Bureau investigation, including inquiries initiated for the purpose of determining whether or not a respondent is complying with an order of the Bureau.

(b) Investigational hearings shall be conducted by any Bureau investigator for the purpose of hearing the testimony of witnesses and receiving documentary material, tangible things, or other information relating to any subject under investigation. Such hearings shall be under oath or affirmation and stenographically reported, and a transcript thereof shall be made a part of the record of the investigation. The Bureau investigator conducting the investigational hearing also may direct that the testimony be recorded by audio, audiovisual, or other means, in which case the recording shall be made a part of the record of the investigation as well.

(c) In investigational hearings, the Bureau investigators shall exclude from the hearing room all persons except the person being examined, his or her counsel, the officer before whom the testimony is to be taken, any investigator or representative of an agency with which the Bureau is engaged in a joint investigation, and any individual transcribing or recording such testimony. At the discretion of the Bureau investigator, and with the consent of the person being examined, persons other than those listed in this paragraph may be present in the hearing room. The Bureau investigator shall certify or direct the individual transcribing the testimony to certify on the transcript that the witness was duly sworn and that the transcript is a true record of the testimony given by the witness. A copy of the transcript shall be forwarded promptly by the Bureau investigator to the custodian designated in § 1080.13.

§ 1080.8Withholding requested material.

(a) Any person withholding material responsive to a civil investigative demand or any other request for production of material shall assert a claim of privilege not later than the date set for the production of material. Such person shall, if so directed in the civil investigative demand or other request for production, submit, together with such claim, a schedule of the items withheld which states, as to each such item, the type, specific subject matter, and date of the item; the names, addresses, positions, and organizations of all authors and recipients of the item; and the specific grounds for claiming that the item is privileged. The person who submits the schedule and the attorney stating the grounds for a claim that any item is privileged must sign it.

(b) A person withholding material solely for reasons described in this subsection shall comply with the requirements of this subsection in lieu of filing a petition for an order modifying or setting aside a civil investigative demand pursuant to § 1080.6(d).

(c) Disclosure of privileged or protected information or communications produced pursuant to a civil investigative demand shall be handled as follows:

(1) The disclosure of privileged or protected information or communications shall not operate as a waiver if:

(i) The disclosure was inadvertent;

(ii) The holder of the privilege or protection took reasonable steps to prevent disclosure; and

(iii) The holder promptly took reasonable steps to rectify the error, including notifying a Bureau investigator of the claim and the basis for it.

(2) After being notified, the Bureau investigator must promptly return, sequester, or destroy the specified information and any copies; must not use or disclose the information until the claim is resolved; must take reasonable steps to retrieve the information if he or she disclosed it before being notified; and, if appropriate, may sequester such material until such time as a hearing officer or court rules on the merits of the claim of privilege or protection. The producing party must preserve the information until the claim is resolved.

(3) The disclosure of privileged or protected information or communications shall waive theprivilege or protection as to undisclosed information or communications only if:

(i) The waiver is intentional;

(ii) The disclosed and undisclosed information or communications concern the same subject matter; and

(iii) They ought in fairness to be considered together.

§ 1080.9Rights of witnesses in investigations.

(a) Any person compelled to submit documentary material, tangible things, or written reports or answers to questions to the Bureau, or to testify in an investigational hearing, shall be entitled to retain a copy or, on payment of lawfully prescribed costs, request a copy of the materials, things, reports, or written answers submitted, or a transcript of his or her testimony. The Bureau, however, may for good cause deny such a request and limit the witness to inspection of the official transcript of the testimony. Upon completion of transcription of the testimony of the witness, the witness shall be offered an opportunity to read the transcript of his or her testimony. Any changes in form or substance that the witness desires to make shall be entered and identified upon the transcript by the Bureau investigator with a statement of the reasons given by the witness for making such changes. The transcript shall then be signed by the witness unless the witness cannot be found, is ill, waives in writing his or her right to signature, or refuses to sign. If the transcript is not signed by the witness within thirty (30) days of being afforded a reasonable opportunity to review it, the Bureau investigator, or the individual transcribing the testimony acting at the Bureau investigator's direction, shall sign the transcript and state on the record the fact of the waiver, illness, absence of the witness, or the refusal to sign, together with any reasons given for the failure to sign.

(b) Any witness compelled to appear in person at an investigational hearing may be accompanied, represented, and advised by counsel as follows:

(1) Counsel for a witness may advise the witness, in confidence and upon the initiative of either counsel or the witness, with respect to any question asked of the witness for which an objection pursuant to paragraph (b) (2) of this section may properly be made. If the witness refuses to answer a question, counsel may briefly state on the record if he or she has advised the witness not to answer the question and the legal grounds for such refusal.

(2) Where it is claimed that a witness is privileged to refuse to answer a question or to produce other evidence, the witness or counsel for the witness shall object on the record to the question or requirement and may state briefly and precisely the ground therefor. The witness and his or her counsel shall not otherwise object to or refuse to answer any question, and they shall not otherwise interrupt the oral examination.

(3) Any objections made under the rules in this part will be treated as continuing objections and preserved throughout the further course of the hearing without the necessity for repeating them as to any similar line of inquiry. Cumulative objections are unnecessary. Repetition of the grounds for any objection will not be allowed.

(4) Counsel for a witness may not, for any purpose or to any extent not allowed by paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section, interrupt the examination of the witness by making any objections or statements on the record. Petitions challenging the Bureau's authority to conduct the investigation or the sufficiency or legality of the civil investigative demand shall be addressed to the Bureau in advance of the hearing. Copies of such petitions may be filed as part of the record of the investigation with the Bureau investigator conducting the investigational hearing, but no arguments in support thereof will be allowed at the hearing.

(5) Following completion of the examination of a witness, counsel for the witness may, on the record, request that the Bureau investigator conducting the investigational hearing permit the witness to clarify any of his or her answers. The grant or denial of such request shall be within the sole discretion of the Bureau investigator conducting the hearing.

(6) The Bureau investigator conducting the hearing shall take all necessary action to regulate the course of the hearing to avoid delay and to prevent or restrain disorderly, dilatory, obstructionist, or contumacious conduct, or contemptuous language. Such Bureau investigator shall, for reasons stated on the record, immediately report to the Bureau any instances where an attorney has allegedly refused to comply with his or her obligations under the rules in this part, or has allegedly engaged in disorderly, dilatory, obstructionist, or contumacious conduct, or contemptuous language in the course of the hearing. The Bureau will thereupon take such further action, if any, as the circumstances warrant, including suspension or disbarment of the attorney from further practice before the Bureau or exclusion from further participation in the particular investigation.

§ 1080.10Noncompliance with civil investigative demands.

(a) In cases of failure to comply in whole or in part with Bureau civil investigative demands, appropriate action may be initiated by the Bureau, including actions for enforcement.

(b) The Assistant Director of the Division of Enforcement and the General Counsel are authorized to:

(1) Institute, on behalf of the Bureau, an enforcement proceeding in the district court of the United States for any judicial district in which a person resides, is found, or transacts business, in connection with the failure or refusal of such person to comply with, or to obey, a civil investigative demand in whole or in part if the return date or any extension thereof has passed; and

(2) Seek civil contempt or other appropriate relief in cases where a court order enforcing a civil investigative demand has been violated.

§ 1080.11Disposition.

(a) When the facts disclosed by an investigation indicate that an enforcement action is warranted, further proceedings may be instituted in federal or state court or pursuant to the Bureau's administrative adjudicatory process. Where appropriate, the Bureau also may refer investigations to appropriate federal, state, or foreign governmental agencies.

(b) When the facts disclosed by an investigation indicate that an enforcement action is not necessary or would not be in the public interest, the investigational file will be closed. The matter may be further investigated, at any time, if circumstances so warrant.

(c) The Assistant Director of the Division of Enforcement is authorized to close Bureau investigations.

§ 1080.12Orders requiring witnesses to testify or provide other information and granting immunity.

(a) The Assistant Director of the Division of Enforcement is hereby authorized to request approval from the Attorney General of the United States for the issuance of an order requiring a witness to testify or provide other information granting immunity under 18 U.S.C. 6004.

(b) The Bureau retains the right to review the exercise of any of the functions delegated under paragraph (a) of this section. Appeals to the Bureau from an order requiring a witness to testify or provide other information will be entertained by the Bureau only upon a showing that a substantial question is involved, the determination of which isessential to serve the interests of justice. Such appeals shall be made on the record and shall be in the form of a brief not to exceed fifteen (15) pages in length and shall be filed within five (5) days after notice of the complained of action. The appeal shall not operate to suspend the hearing unless otherwise determined by the Bureau investigator conducting the hearing or ordered by the Bureau.

§ 1080.13Custodians.

(a) The Bureau shall designate a custodian and one or more deputy custodians for material to be delivered pursuant to a civil investigative demand in an investigation. The custodian shall have the powers and duties prescribed by section 1052 of the Act, 12 U.S.C. 5562. Deputy custodians may perform all of the duties assigned to custodians.

(b) Material produced pursuant to a civil investigative demand, while in the custody of the custodian, shall be for the official use of the Bureau in accordance with the Act; but such material shall upon reasonable notice to the custodian be made available for examination by the person who produced such material, or his or her duly authorized representative, during regular office hours established for the Bureau.

(a) Documentary materials and tangible things the Bureau receives pursuant to a civil investigative demand are subject to the requirements and procedures relating to the disclosure of records and information set forth in part 1070 of this chapter.

(b) Bureau investigations generally are non-public. Bureau investigators may disclose the existence of an investigation to potential witnesses or third parties to the extent necessary to advance the investigation.

Section 1042(c) of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (“Act”), requires the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (“CFPB” or “Bureau”) to prescribe rules establishing procedures that govern the process, described in section 1042(b) of the Act, by which state officials notify the CFPB of actions or proceedings undertaken pursuant to the authority granted in section 1042(a) to enforce the Act or regulations prescribed thereunder. This interim final rule with a request for public comment sets forth those rules.

DATES:

This interim final rule is effective on July 28, 2011. Written comments are invited and must be received on or before September 26, 2011.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments, identified byDocket No. CFPB-2011-0005,by any of the following methods:

All submissions must include the agency name and docket number or Regulatory Information Number (RIN) for this rulemaking. In general, all comments received will be posted without change tohttp://www.regulations.gov.In addition, comments will be available for public inspection and copying at 1801 L Street, NW., Washington, DC 20036, on official business days between the hours of 10 a.m. and 5 p.m. Eastern Time. You can make an appointment to inspect the documents by telephoning (202) 435-7275.

All comments, including attachments and other supporting materials, will become part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. Sensitive personal information, such as account numbers or social security numbers, should not be included. Comments will not be edited to remove any identifying or contact information.

The CFPB issues these State Official Notification Rules (“Rules”), pursuant to sections 1042(b) and (c) of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (“Act”),112 U.S.C. 5552(b), (c). These Rules are promulgated as an interim final rule with a request for comment. The CFPB invites interested members of the public to submit written comments addressing the issues raised herein.

1The Act is Title X of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, as amended, Public Law 111-203 (July 21, 2010), Title X, 12 U.S.C. 5481et seq.Section 1066 of the Act grants the Secretary of the Treasury interim authority to perform certain functions of the CFPB. Pursuant to that authority, Treasury publishes these Rules on behalf of the CFPB.

A. Background

These Rules will govern the process by which state officials notify the CFPB of actions or proceedings undertaken under section 1042(a) of the Act, 12 U.S.C. 5552(a), to enforce the Act, or regulations prescribed thereunder.

The Rules implement a procedure for the timing and content of the notice required to be given to the CFPB, set forth the responsibilities of CFPB employees and others who receive the notice, and specify the rights of the CFPB to participate in an action brought by a state official. In drafting these Rules, the CFPB endeavored to create a process that would both provide the CFPB and the relevant prudential regulators with timely notice of pending actions and account for the investigation and litigation needs of state law enforcement agencies. In keeping with this approach, the Rules provide for a default notice period of at least 10 days, with exceptions for emergencies and other extenuating circumstances, and require substantive notice that is both straightforward and comprehensive. The Rules further make clear that the CFPB can participate as appropriate in an action brought by state officials under the Act or a regulation prescribed thereunder, provide for confidential treatment of information disclosed to the CFPB and prudential regulators under these Rules, and establish that provision of notice shall not constitute a waiver of any applicable privilege. In addition, the Rules specify that the notice provisions do not create any procedural or substantive rights for parties in litigation against the United States or against a state which brings an action under the Act or a regulation prescribed thereunder.

B. Section Summary

The Rules are set forth in a single section, with several paragraphs, each of which is addressed below.

Section 1082.1(a) Notice Requirement

This paragraph sets out the timing and process for the provision of noticeby state officials under non-emergency circumstances. The paragraph requires state officials to provide notice no later than 10 days prior to initiating an action to enforce the Act or any regulation prescribed thereunder. The paragraph also identifies to whom and how the notice should be sent and sets out an exception to the timing of notice.

Section 1082.1(b) Emergency Actions

Section 1082.1(b) sets out the process for the provision of notice in emergency circumstances. The paragraph lays out the reasons for not providing notice in accordance with § 1082.1(a), and establishes a deadline to provide notice of no more than 48 hours after the initiation of an action. The paragraph also identifies to whom and how the notice should be sent, and also sets out an exception to the timing of notice.

Section 1082.1(c) Contents of Notice

In this paragraph, the CFPB specifies the information that must be included in the notice provided by state officials. This paragraph also details certain additional information that must be provided when notice is not given until after an action has been initiated.

Section 1082.1(d) Bureau Response

Section 1082.1(d) describes how the CFPB may intervene or otherwise participate in an action initiated by a state official.

Section 1082.1(e) Confidentiality and Privilege

Section 1082.1(e) provides that the CFPB and any prudential regulator who receives notice shall not disclose any non-public information about the notice, and also establishes certain exceptions to this requirement. In addition, the paragraph states that the provision of notice shall not constitute a waiver of any applicable privilege.

Section 1082.1(f) No Private Right of Action or Defense

This paragraph clarifies that the Rules do not create any right, benefit, or defense which is enforceable against the United States or state officials enforcing the Act or any regulation prescribed thereunder.

C. Procedural Requirements1. Regulatory Requirements

The Rules relate solely to “agency organization, procedure, or practice” and, thus, are not subject to the notice and comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”).See5 U.S.C. 551et seq.Even if these requirements did apply, the CFPB for good cause finds that in these circumstances providing advance notice and opportunity for comment would be impracticable and contrary to the public interest.See5 U.S.C. 553(b). The Bureau also finds that there is good cause to issue this rule effective immediately.See5 U.S.C. 553(d). Pursuant to the Act, state officials are permitted to begin bringing actions under the Act on July 21, 2011. In order to ensure that the CFPB, which is the primary agency responsible for administration of the Act and promulgating regulations under the Act, is aware of all legal developments related to the Act and situated to take appropriate action, it is necessary that the CFPB be informed of pending actions. The failure to promptly enact the Rules will leave the CFPB without the necessary information to evaluate actions taken pursuant to the Act and determine an appropriate response, which may impair the efficiency and consistency with which the Act is enforced. Thus, the CFPB has determined that this interim rule should be issued, effective immediately, without advance notice and opportunity for comment. Nevertheless, the CFPB invites public comment on the Rules.

Because no notice of proposed rulemaking is required, the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601(2), do not apply.

The collection of information contained in this rule has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) for review in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507(d), under control number 1505-0237. The estimated time per response is 30 minutes. An agency may not conduct or sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB control number.

2. Section 1022(b)(2) Provisions

The CFPB has conducted an analysis of benefits, costs, and impacts2and consulted with the prudential regulators, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Department of Justice, and the Federal Trade Commission, including with respect to whether the Rules are consistent with any relevant prudential, market, and systemic objectives administered by such agencies.3

2Section 1022(b)(2)(A) addresses the consideration of the potential benefits and costs of regulation to consumers and industry, including the potential reduction of access by consumers to consumer financial products or services; the impact of proposed rules on depository institutions and credit unions with $10 billion or less in total assets as described in Section 1026 of the Dodd-Frank Act; and the impact on consumers in rural areas.

3The President's July 11, 2011, Executive Order 13579 entitled “Regulation and Independent Regulatory Agencies,” asks the independent agencies to follow the cost-saving, burden-reducing principles in Executive Order 13563; harmonization and simplification of rules; flexible approaches that reduce costs; and scientific integrity. In the spirit of Executive Order 13563, the CFPB has consulted with the Office of Management and Budget regarding this interim final rule.

The CFPB concludes that the Rules will benefit consumers and covered persons alike. The Rules do not impose any obligations on consumers or covered persons, nor do they have any direct relevance to consumers' access to consumer financial products and services. Rather, they provide for notice to the CFPB and prudential regulators when a state initiates an action under the Act, or a regulation prescribed thereunder. The notice provided to the CFPB may result in a CFPB decision to join an enforcement action, which may result in marginal additional costs to the relevant covered person. On the other hand, the Rules will help ensure more efficient and consistent implementation of the Act, which benefits both consumers and covered persons.

Further, the Rules have no unique impact on insured depository institutions or insured credit unions with less than $10 billion in assets described in section 1026(a) of the Act, and do not have a unique impact on rural consumers.

For the reasons set forth above, the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection adds part 1082 to Chapter X in Title 12 of the Code of Federal Regulations to read as set forth below.

TITLE 12—BANKS AND BANKINGCHAPTER X—BUREAU OF CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTIONPART 1082—STATE OFFICIAL NOTIFICATION RULESAuthority:

Pub. L. 111-203, Title X.

§ 1082.1Procedures for notifying the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection when a state official takes an action to enforce the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010.

(a)Notice requirement.

(1) Pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 5552(b) and except as discussed in paragraph (b) ofthis section, every State attorney general and State regulator (collectively “State Official”) shall provide the notice described in paragraph (c) of this section to the Division of Enforcement of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (“Bureau”), the division of the Bureau responsible for enforcement of Federal consumer financial law pursuant to the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010, as amended, Public Law 111-203 (July 21, 2010), Title X, 12 U.S.C. 5481et seq.(“Act”), and the Office of the Executive Secretary of the Bureau at least 10 days prior to initiating any action or proceeding in any court or other administrative or regulatory proceeding against any covered person to enforce any provision of the Act or any regulation prescribed thereunder, including but not limited to the filing of a complaint, motion for relief, or other document which initiates an action or proceeding.

(2) Notice shall be provided to the Division of Enforcement and the Office of the Executive Secretary, or their successor offices, via electronic mail toEnforcement@cfpb.govandExecSec@cfpb.gov.In the event of technical problems preventing the delivery of notice, the Division of Enforcement or its successor entity should be contacted.

(3) On the same date that notice is provided to the Division of Enforcement and the Office of the Executive Secretary pursuant to paragraph (a)(1) of this section, a copy of the notice shall be sent to the relevant prudential regulator, if any, or the designee thereof, by mail or electronic mail.

(4) Notice shall be deemed to have been provided as of the date of mailing the materials described in paragraph (c) of this section.

(5) The Division of Enforcement, or its successor entity, in consultation with a State Official, may provide, for good cause shown, an alternative deadline for the notice described in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.

(b)Emergency actions.

(1) Pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 5552(b), in the event that a State Official initiates or intends to initiate an action or proceeding and, in order to protect the public interest or prevent irreparable and imminent harm, is unable to provide timely notice as described in paragraph (a) of this section, the State Official shall provide the notice described in paragraph (c) of this section as soon as is practicable and not later than 48 hours after initiation of the action or proceeding.

(2) Notice shall be provided in accordance with the procedures set forth in paragraphs (a)(2) through (a)(4) of this section.

(3) The Division of Enforcement, or its successor entity, in consultation with a State Official, may provide, for good cause shown, an alternative deadline for the notice described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section.

(c)Contents of notice.

(1) Pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 5552(b), the notice required under paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section shall include a written description of the anticipated action or proceeding, including:

(i) The court or body in which the action or proceeding is to be initiated;

(ii) The identity of the parties to the action or proceeding;

(iii) The nature of the action or proceeding to be initiated;

(iv) The anticipated date of initiating the action or proceeding;

(v) The alleged facts underlying the action or proceeding;

(vi) A contact name, electronic mail address, and phone number of an individual involved with the matter in the office of the State Official with whom the Bureau may consult; and

(vii) A determination as to whether there may be a need to coordinate the prosecution of the action or proceeding so as not to interfere with any action, including any rulemaking, undertaken by the Bureau, a prudential regulator, or another Federal agency.

(2) The notice required under paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section shall further include a complete and unredacted copy of any complaint, motion for relief, or similar document that is the subject of the notice, in its form as of the date the notice is provided. To the extent the complaint, motion for relief, or similar document contains the information described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section, provision of the complaint, motion for relief, or similar document shall be deemed sufficient notice of that information.

(3) In the event that notice is provided after the initiation of an action or proceeding, the written description shall also include the following, in addition to the information described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section:

(i) A brief description of any proceeding that occurred as a result of the initiation of the action or proceeding, including any orders issued by a court or other body;

(ii) Any case number, matter number, or designation assigned to the action or proceeding; and

(iii) Information on scheduled court or other administrative or regulatory proceedings.

(4) In the event that notice is provided after the initiation of an action or proceeding, in addition to the requirements set forth in paragraph (c)(3) of this section, the notice shall further include a complete, unredacted copy of any document filed by any party in relation to the action or proceeding and any orders issued by the court or other body.

(5) If the State Official, after providing the notice described in paragraphs (c)(1) and (c)(2) of this section, intends to file a complaint, motion for relief, or similar document that is materially different from the document included with the notice, the State Official shall provide a copy of that document prior to filing, in accordance with the method described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section.

(d)Bureau response.In any action or proceeding described in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, the Bureau may:

(1) Intervene in the action or proceeding as a party;

(2) Upon intervening,

(i) Remove the action to the appropriate United States district court, if the action or proceeding was not originally brought there; and

(ii) Be heard on all matters arising in the action;

(3) Appeal any order or judgment, to the same extent as any other party in the proceeding may; and

(4) Otherwise participate in the action as appropriate.

(e)Confidentiality and privilege.

(1) Unless and until such information becomes publically available, the substance and fact of the notice described in paragraph (c) of this section, including the complaint, motion for relief, or other document, shall not be disclosed by the Bureau or any relevant prudential regulator who received the notice except as permitted by paragraphs (e)(3) and (e)(4) of this section or as required by law.

(2) Provision of notice by a State Official and disclosure of notice pursuant to paragraphs (e)(3) and (e)(4) of this section shall not be deemed a waiver of any applicable privilege.

(3) Notwithstanding paragraph (e)(1) of this section, the Bureau and any relevant prudential regulator who received the notice described in paragraph (c) of this section may share the substance or fact of the notice with another entity pursuant to the consent of the State Official who provided the notice.

(4) Notwithstanding paragraphs (e)(1) and (e)(3) of this section, the Bureau may share the substance and fact of the notice described in paragraph (c) of this section with another state or federal government entity when necessary to protect the public interest, afterconsultation with the State Official who provided the notice.

(f)No private right of action or defense.The requirements set forth in this section are not intended to, do not, and may not be relied upon to create any right, benefit, or defense, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law by a party against the United States or any State enforcing the provisions of the Act or any regulation prescribed thereunder.

This action establishes Class E airspace at Nephi UT, to accommodate aircraft using new Area Navigation (RNAV) Global Positioning System (GPS) standard instrument approach procedures at Nephi Municipal Airport. This improves the safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport.

DATES:

Effective date, 0901 UTC, October 20, 2011. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 1 CFR Part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

On May 17, 2011, the FAA published in theFederal Registera notice of proposed rulemaking to establish Class E airspace at Nephi, UT (76 FR 28382). Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.

Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005, of FAA Order 7400.9U dated August 18, 2010, and effective September 15, 2010, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR Part 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in that Order.

The Rule

This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Part 71 by establishing Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface, at Nephi Municipal Airport, Nephi, UT, to accommodate IFR aircraft executing new RNAV (GPS) standard instrument approach procedures at the airport. This action is necessary for the safety and management of IFR operations.

The FAA has determined this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 discusses the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it establishes controlled airspace at Nephi Municipal Airport, Nephi, UT.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS1. The authority citation for 14 CFR Part 71 continues to read as follows:Authority:

This action establishes Class E airspace at Kayenta, AZ. Controlled airspace is necessary to accommodateaircraft using a new Area Navigation (RNAV) Global Positioning System (GPS) standard instrument approach procedures at Kayenta Airport. This improves the safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport.

DATES:

Effective date, 0901 UTC, October 20, 2011. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 1 CFR Part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

On May 25, 2011, the FAA published in theFederal Registera notice of proposed rulemaking to establish controlled airspace at Kayenta, AZ (76 FR 30299). Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.

Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005 of FAA Order 7400.9U dated August 18, 2010, and effective September 15, 2010, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR Part 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in that Order.

The Rule

This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Part 71 by establishing Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface, at Kayenta, Airport, to accommodate IFR aircraft executing new RNAV (GPS) standard instrument approach procedures at the airport. This action is necessary for the safety and management of IFR operations.

The FAA has determined this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 discusses the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it establishes controlled airspace at Kayenta Airport, Kayenta, AZ.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS1. The authority citation for 14 CFR Part 71 continues to read as follows:Authority:

§ 71.1[Amended]2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR Part 71.1 of the Federal Aviation Administration Order 7400.9U, Airspace Designations and Reporting Points, dated August 18, 2010, and effective September 15, 2010 is amended as follows:Paragraph 6005Class E airspace areas extending upward from 700 feet or more above the surface of the earth.AWP AZ E5Kayenta, AZ [New]Kayenta Airport, AZ(Lat. 36°42′59″ N., long. 110°13′42″W.)

That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 7.7-mile radius of the Kayenta Airport, and within 4 miles either side of the 066° bearing of the airport extending from the 7.7-mile radius to 14.5 miles northeast of Kayenta Airport; that airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface within an area bounded by lat. 36°54′00″ N., long. 110°03′00″ W.; to lat. 36°48′00″ N., long. 109°44′00″ W.; to lat. 36°26′00″ N., long. 109°14′00″ W.; to lat. 36°11′00″ N., long. 109°26′00″ W.; to lat. 36°03′00″ N., long. 110°12′00″ W.; to lat. 36°22′00″ N., long. 110°44′00″ W.; to lat. 36°42′00″ N., long. 110°31′00″ W.; to lat. 36°50′00″ N., long. 110°25′00″ W., thence to the point of beginning.

This action modifies Class D and Class E airspace at Fort Huachuca, AZ, to accommodate aircraft departing and arriving under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) at Fort Huachuca, Sierra Vista Municipal Airport-Libby Army Airfield. This action, initiated by the biennial review of the Fort Huachuca airspace area, enhances the safety and management of aircraft operations at the airport. This action also updates the airport name.

DATES:

Effective date, 0901 UTC, October 20, 2011. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 1 CFR Part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

On May 20, 2011, the FAA published in theFederal Registera notice of proposed rulemaking to modify controlled airspace at Fort Huachuca, AZ (76 FR 29179). Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting writtencomments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.

Class D and E airspace designations are published in paragraph 5000, 6004 and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.9U dated August 18, 2010, and effective September 15, 2010, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR Part 71.1. The Class D and Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in that Order.

The Rule

This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Part 71 by modifying Class D airspace, and Class E airspace designated as an extension to Class D surface area, and airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface, at Fort Huachuca, AZ. The FAA's biennial review of the airspace found additional controlled airspace necessary for the safety and management of aircraft departing and arriving under IFR operations at Fort Huachuca, Sierra Vista Municipal Airport-Libby Army Airfield. This action updates the geographic coordinates to coincide with the FAA's aeronautical database, and changes the airport name from Fort Huachuca, Libby AAF/Sierra Vista Municipal Airport, to Fort Huachuca, Sierra Vista Municipal Airport-Libby Army Airfield. This action is necessary for the safety and management of IFR operations.

The FAA has determined this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 discusses the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it creates additional controlled airspace at Fort Huachuca, Sierra Vista Municipal Airport-Libby Army Airfield, Fort Huachuca, AZ.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS1. The authority citation for 14 CFR Part 71 continues to read as follows:Authority:

That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including 7,200 feet MSL within a 4.7-mile radius of the airport. This Class D airspace is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory.

That airspace extending upward from the surface within 1.6 miles each side of the Airport 088° bearing, extending from the 4.7-mile radius of the airport to 7 miles east of the airport, and that airspace extending upward from the surface within 1 mile each side of the Airport 270° bearing, extending from the 4.7-mile radius of the airport to 5.5 miles west of the airport. This Class E airspace area is effective during the specific dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in the Airport/Facility Directory.

That airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface within a 7.3-mile radius of the airport, and within 3.5 miles each side of the Airport 270° bearing extending 9 miles west of the airport, and that airspace 4 miles south and 8 miles north along the Airport 088° bearing extending 15.5 miles east of the airport, excluding that area within Restricted Area R-2312. That airspace extending upward from 1,200 feet above the surface within a 25-mile radius of Fort Huachuca-Sierra Vista Municipal Airport-Libby Army Airfield, excluding that area within Mexican airspace.

This action modifies Class E airspace at Wokal Field/Glasgow International Airport, Glasgow, MT. Controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate aircraft using Area Navigation (RNAV) Global Positioning System (GPS) standard instrument approach procedures at the airport. This improves the safety and management of Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations at the airport. This action also updates the airport name.

DATES:

Effective date, 0901 UTC, October 20, 2011. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 1 CFR part 51, subject to the annualrevision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

On May 25, 2011, the FAA published in theFederal Registera notice of proposed rulemaking to amend Class E controlled airspace at Glasgow, MT (76 FR 30300). Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.

Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6002 and 6005, respectively, of FAA Order 7400.9U dated August 18, 2010, and effective September 15, 2010, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR part 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in that Order.

The Rule

This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Part 71 by modifying Class E surface airspace, and Class E airspace extending upward from 700 feet above the surface, at Wokal Field/Glasgow International Airport, Glasgow, MT. Controlled airspace is necessary to accommodate IFR aircraft executing RNAV (GPS) standard instrument approach procedures at the airport. This action is necessary for the safety and management of IFR operations. This action also updates the airport name from Glasgow International Airport to Wokal Field/Glasgow International Airport.

The FAA has determined this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 discusses the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it creates additional controlled airspace at Wokal Field/Glasgow International Airport, Glasgow, MT.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS1. The authority citation for 14 CFR Part 71 continues to read as follows:Authority:

Within a 4.2-mile radius of the Wokal Field/Glasgow International Airport, and within 2.7 miles each side of the Glasgow VOR/DME 327° radial extending from the 4.2-mile radius to 7.4 miles northwest of the VOR/DME, and within 2.7 miles each side of the Glasgow VOR/DME 127° radial extending from the 4.2-mile radius to 7.4 miles southeast of the VOR/DME, and within 2.7 miles each side of the Milk River NDB 106° bearing extending from the 4.2-mile radius to 7.4 miles east of the NDB.

Effective date, 0901 UTC, October 20, 2011. The Director of the Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under 1 CFR Part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and publication of conforming amendments.

On May 19, 2011, the FAA published in theFederal Registera notice of proposed rulemaking to amend controlled airspace at Alturas, CA (76 FR 28915). Interested parties were invited to participate in this rulemaking effort by submitting written comments on the proposal to the FAA. No comments were received.

Class E airspace designations are published in paragraph 6005, of FAA Order 7400.9U dated August 18, 2010, and effective September 15, 2010, which is incorporated by reference in 14 CFR Part 71.1. The Class E airspace designations listed in this document will be published subsequently in that Order.

The FAA has determined this regulation only involves an established body of technical regulations for which frequent and routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current. Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is certified this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106 discusses the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority. This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority as it establishes additional controlled airspace at Alturas Municipal Airport, Alturas, CA.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation Administration amends 14 CFR Part 71 as follows:

PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS1. The authority citation for 14 CFR Part 71 continues to read as follows:Authority:

Final Rule, limited extension of effective date for certain provisions.

SUMMARY:

The Department of Transportation is delaying the effective date for certain requirements adopted in an April 25, 2011 final rule on enhancing airline passenger protections. Specifically, the Department is delaying the effective date from August 23, 2011 to January 24, 2012, for requirements pertaining to baggage fees, post purchase price increases, flight status changes and holding a reservation without payment for twenty-four hours. The Department is also delaying the effective date from October 24, 2011 to January 24, 2012 for requirements pertaining to full fare advertising. The effective date remains August 23, 2011 for all the other requirements in the April 25, 2011 final rule, including the requirement not to permit an international flight to remain on the tarmac at a U.S. airport for more than four hours without allowing passengers to deplane, the requirement increasing the denied boarding compensation airlines must pay to passengers bumped from flights, and the requirement to disclose prominently all fees for optional aviation services on carriers' Web sites.

DATES:

This rule is effective on July 28, 2011. The effective date of the final rule published at 76 FR 23110, April 25, 2011, continues to be August 23, 2011, except for the amendments relating to 14 CFR 399.84, 399.85(b) and (c), 399.87, 399.88, 399.89, 259.8, and 259.5(b)(4) which become effective on January 24, 2012.

On April 25, 2011, the Department of Transportation published a final rule in theFederal Register(76 FR 23110), titled “Enhancing Airline Passenger Protections,” containing many new requirements to improve the air travel environment for consumers, expanding upon the improved passenger rights included in a rule published on December 30, 2009. More specifically, the April 25, 2011, rule (1) Increases the number of carriers that are required to adopt tarmac delay contingency plans and includes additional airports at which they must adhere to the plan's terms; (2) increases the number of carriers that are required to report tarmac delay information to the Department; (3) expands the group of carriers that are required to adopt, follow, and audit customer service plans and establishes minimum standards for the subjects all carriers must cover in such plans; (4) adds carriers to those required to include their contingency plans and customer service plans on their Web sites; (5) increases the number of carriers that must respond to consumer complaints; (6) enhances protections afforded passengers in oversales situations, including increasing the denied boarding compensation airlines must pay to passengers bumped from flights; (7) strengthens, clarifies and codifies the Department's enforcement policies concerning air transportation price advertising practices; (8) requires carriers to notify consumers of optional fees related to air transportation and of increases in baggage fees; (9) prohibits post-purchase price increases; (10) requires carriers to provide passengers timely notice of flight status changes such as delays and cancellations; and (11) prohibits carriers from imposing unfair contract of carriage choice-of-forum provisions. As published, the effective date of the rule is August 23, 2011, except for the full fare advertising amendments which become effective on October 24, 2011.

We received requests from U.S. carrier associations, foreign carrier associations and a travel agent association to delay the effective date of certain provisions in this rule. The Air Transport Association of America (ATA), the Regional Airline Association (RAA) and the Air Carrier Association of America (ACAA) requested that the Department of Transportation delay by 180 days the compliance time for the full fare advertising amendments in 14 CFR 399.84, the denied boarding compensation amendments in 14 CFR part 250, the requirement to disclose baggage fees in e-ticket confirmations in 14 CFR 399.85(c), and the requirement in 14 CFR 399.87 for the same baggage allowances and fees to apply to a passenger throughout an itinerary. These U.S. carrier associations state that they have limited their request to the four provisions that require deployment of additional IT resources, development of new protocols and the training of many employees. The National Air Carrier Association (NACA) joined the request to delay the effective date and stated that it also believes compliance cannot be achieved within the time contemplated by the regulation without undue cost to the airlines and confusion to the traveling public.

According to the U.S. carrier associations, it will take more than the time allotted by the final rule to comply with the amendments to the denied boarding compensation rule because of the need to make additional systems and programming changes and the need to ensure the appropriate offices and employees are aware of and trained on the changes to this rule. The carrier associations also ask for additional time to comply with the requirement to disclose baggage fees in e-ticket confirmations if detailed baggage fee information individualized to a particular passenger is required and if the notice of applicable baggage information must be in text form and a hyperlink is not allowed. In addition, the U.S. carrier associations assert that it is not possible to comply with the requirement to apply the same baggage allowances and fees to a passenger throughout an itinerary without an additional 180 days as no central repository for carrier baggage policies and fees currently exists. They note that carriers are working to develop an industry solution to comply with this requirement but more time is needed.

The U.S. carrier associations are particularly concerned about the full fare advertising requirements, which they contend they cannot meet by the published effective date of October 24, 2011. They state that this aspect of the final rule requires the greatest IT investment and that carriers are preparing to reprogram and reconfigure their online search engines to incorporate the new advertising requirements but that carriers would need at least an additional 180 days to create, modify and test these changes. The associations ask that the Department delay the effective date for not only online advertising but also print advertising so that consumers receive consistent advertising of fares through all advertising channels.

The foreign air carrier associations have indicated their strong support of the request by the U.S. carrier associations and have asked that the 180-day extension be expanded to cover all the requirements being imposed for the first time on non-U.S. airlines. These associations are the International Air Transport Association (IAT), Association of Asia Pacific Airlines (AAPA), Association of European Airlines (AEA), and Latin and Caribbean Air Transport Association (ALTA). They have stated that they believe investments and changes are needed to meet the new DOT requirements. They also state that the ability of the non-U.S. airlines to meet these requirements in a timely fashion is impacted by constraints on existing operations, staffing, IT support, local laws and regulations, labor practices and resources.

In addition to the airlines, the American Society of Travel Agents (ASTA) has requested an extension of the effective date of the final rule. ASTA requests that the Department delay the effective date of the requirement in section 399.85(b) to disclose baggage fee information on Web sites when a fare quotation for a specific itinerary is selected by a consumer and the requirement in section 399.85(c) to disclose baggage fee information on all e-ticket confirmations. ASTA's request differs from the requests of the U.S. and foreign air carrier associations in that ASTA is not requesting a specific amount of additional time to implement the requirements. Rather, ASTA is asking that the Department defer the effective date of these two requirements until the Department concludes its upcoming rulemaking on disclosure of fees for ancillary services. ASTA, like the U.S. carriers, notes its uncertainty as to whether the requirement to provide specific information to passengers about baggage allowances and baggage fees means providing individualized information about those matters. ASTA also asserts that the two methods the rule describes for agents to provide baggage information to consumers are not feasible. It calls the first method (providing a link to an airline Web site) “an act of commercial suicide” and believes the second method (referring consumers to its own site if it displays airlines' baggage fees) impractical because of the labor cost to achieve it initially and to monitor airline Web sites constantly for updates.

In addition to the requests to delay the effective date of the rule, we received a request from Allegiant Air and Spirit Airlines as well as Southwest Airlines to postpone or stay the effectivedate pending judicial review of various provisions in this regulation by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. In June, Allegiant and Spirit filed petitions for review before that court asserting that the rule unlawfully: (1) Ends the practice of permitting sellers of air transportation to exclude government taxes and fees from the advertised price; (2) prohibits the sale of nonrefundable tickets by requiring airlines to hold reservations at the quoted fare without payment or cancel without penalty for at least twenty-four hours after the reservation is made if the reservation is made one week or more prior to a flight's departure; (3) prohibits post-purchase price increases, including increases in the price of ancillary products and services, after the initial ticket sale; (4) requires baggage fees to be disclosed on e-ticket confirmations; and (5) mandates notification of flight schedule changes. Spirit's and Allegiant's request to the Department to stay the rule pending judicial review covers all the specific provisions that are part of the litigation. Southwest is requesting that the Department stay the effective date of the new full fare advertising rule.

A few other organizations have also provided the Department their views on the requests to stay the rule and the requests to delay the effective date of the rule. The Consumer Travel Alliance (CTA) has expressed its opposition to any delay in implementation of the rulemaking. CTA appears particularly concerned about requests to delay the requirement to disclose baggage fee information to consumers. It notes that airlines have the means through the Airline Tariff Publishing Company (ATPCO) to disclose all baggage fee information so that both airlines and ticket agents can easily disclose baggage fee information to consumers. The Airports Council International-North America (ACI-NA) has also noted its concern with the recent filings requesting extensions to the effective date of the rule but states that it recognizes that the Department may determine that the implementation date for some portions of the regulations may need to be delayed. ACI-NA does urge the Department to not delay the implementation date for U.S. carriers to extend their tarmac delay plans to small and non-hub airports.

Similarly, an individual commenter who works in the travel industry stated that it may be appropriate to delay the effective date of certain provisions in the final rule such as the full fare advertising requirements but expressed his strong opposition to the blanket request for an extension of the effective date of all the consumer protection requirements in the rule. This individual identified the provisions pertaining to denied boarding compensation and baggage fees as ones that should not be delayed based on his belief that airlines can easily comply with these provisions and their importance to consumers.

After carefully considering all the requests and comments provided, the Department has decided to delay the effective date of the requirements pertaining to full fare advertising (section 399.84) by an additional three months to January 24, 2012, and delay the effective date of certain specific requirements pertaining to baggage fees (sections 399.85(b) and (c) and 399.87), post-purchase price increases (sections 399.88 and 399.89), flight status notifications (section 259.8) and holding a reservation without payment (section 259.5(b)(4)) to the same date. We are denying the request of U.S. carrier associations to delay the effective date of denied boarding compensation amendments and the request of the foreign carrier associations to delay the effective date of the entire rule.

The Department took a number of factors into consideration in deciding to delay certain provisions of the rule until January 24, 2011, including the fact that there are limited objections to the requests for an extension of time. We are persuaded that additional time is needed to comply with the full fare advertising amendments as they relate to online advertising as they may require the deployment of IT resources, and to allow maximum flexibility to make alterations to Web sites with minimal disruption. We also believe that we should apply the same effective date to print advertising so that consumers do not see different advertising displays in different media which could result in consumer confusion.

With regard to baggage fees, there appears to be some confusion regarding what the Department meant by the requirement in section 399.85 (b) that “specific baggage fee information” must be disclosed on Web sites when a fare quotation for a specific itinerary is selected by a consumer and by the requirement in section 399.85(c) that carriers must provide information on all e-ticket confirmations regarding the free baggage allowance and fee for a carry-on bag and the first and second checked bag “as specific charges taking into account any factors (e.g.,frequent flyer status, early purchase, and so forth) that affect those charges.” We want to clarify that the rule does not require passenger-specific information concerning baggage allowances and baggage fees on e-ticket confirmations or on Web sites providing fare quotations. We used the term “specific charges” to ensure that the regulated entities understood that a range of fees would not be acceptable under the rule. In other words, carriers must provide specific information to consumers about all the factors that cause the fee for a carry-on bag or the first and second checked bag to vary so passengers can determine for themselves the fees that would apply to them. For example, it would not be sufficient for a carrier to state that the fee for the first checked bag ranges from $0 to $50. However, it would be acceptable if the carrier states that the fee for the first checked bag would be $0 for its elite frequent flyer passengers or those who purchased their ticket with a specified credit card, $25 for passengers who pay for baggage online, and $50 for those passengers who pay at the airport. Of course, carriers are free to provide individualized baggage charge information to passengers but this is not required by the rule.

Although individualized baggage fee information is not required by the final rule, the Department still sees merit in delaying the effective date of the requirements in § 399.85(b) and (c) as the travel agencies need time to determine the method they will use to ensure that specific baggage fee information is available to their consumers. We are also persuaded that additional time is needed by the carriers as they are not permitted under the rule to provide the required notice of applicable baggage charges through a hyperlink. However, we don't believe that it will be in the best interest of consumers to delay the effective date of these provisions until the Department concludes its rulemaking on disclosure of ancillary fees as requested by ASTA.

With respect to the U.S. carrier associations request to delay the effective date of the provision requiring consistent baggage rules across an entire itinerary, the associations have adequately demonstrated the difficulties in applying the same baggage allowances and fees across an itinerary when they cannot readily access each other's fee schedules. We are encouraged that they are working towards an industry solution and have provided them additional time so that an industry standard can be developed. We have also decided to delay the effective date of the provisions pertaining to post purchase price increases, flight status changes and holding a reservation without payment for twenty-four hours to provideadditional time to overcome any technical difficulties in implementing the rules.

In delaying the effective date for these requirements, the Department is balancing the benefit of having these protections in place for consumers as soon as practical with the capability of airlines to comply with the additional requirements being imposed upon them in a reasonable timeframe. We believe the January 24, 2012, date will provide the airlines adequate time to comply with the requirements.

Regulatory Analyses and NoticesA. Administrative Procedure Act

Section 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) generally requires an agency to publish notice of a proposed rule making in theFederal Register. This requirement does not apply, however, if the agency “for good cause finds that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.” Because August 23, 2011 (the effective date for the April 2011 final rule) is fast approaching, the Department finds good cause that this action delaying the effective date should take effect immediately. Today's final rule makes no substantive changes to the rule, but simply delays the effective date of certain provisions until January 24, 2012.

This rulemaking action is not a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 and the Department of Transportation's Regulatory Policies and Procedures. Accordingly, this action has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

C. Regulatory Flexibility Act

Pursuant to section 605 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA), 5 U.S.C. 605(b), as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement and Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA), DOT certifies that this action will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. This action imposes no duties or obligations on small entities.

D. Executive Order 13132 (Federalism)

This action will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national Government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, and therefore will not have federalism implications.

E. Executive Order 13084

This notice has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13084 (“Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments”). Because the provisions for which we are delaying the effective date would not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of the Indian tribal governments or impose substantial direct compliance costs on them, the funding and consultation requirements of Executive Order 13084 do not apply.

F. Paperwork Reduction Act

The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) (44 U.S.C. 3501et seq.) requires that DOT consider the impact of paperwork and other information collection burdens imposed on the public and, under the provisions of PRA section 3507(d), obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information it conducts, sponsors, or requires through regulations. DOT has determined that there are no new information collection requirements associated with this action. The action merely postpones the effective date of a regulatory provision whose paperwork impact has already been analyzed by the Department, and consequently no additional OMB approval is necessary.

G. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

The Department has determined that the requirements of Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 do not apply to this rulemaking.

We are revising our rules to implement amendments to the Social Security Act (Act) made by the Social Security Disability Applicants' Access to Professional Representation Act of 2010 (PRA). We are making permanent the direct fee payment rules for eligible non-attorney representatives under titles II and XVI of the Act and for attorney representatives under title XVI of the Act. We also are revising some of our eligibility policies for non-attorney representatives under titles II and XVI of the Act.

DATES:

These rules are effective August 29, 2011.

Comment Date:To ensure we consider your comments, we must receive them by September 26, 2011.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments by any one of three methods—Internet, fax, or mail. Do not submit the same comments multiple times or by more than one method. Regardless of which method you choose, please state that your comments refer to Docket No. SSA-2010-0025 so that we may associate your comments with the correct regulation.

Caution: You should be careful to include in your comments only information that you wish to make publicly available. We strongly urge you not to include in your comments any personal information, such as Social Security numbers or medical information.

1.Internet:We strongly recommend that you submit your comments via the Internet. Please visit the Federal eRulemaking portal athttp://www.regulations.gov. Use theSearchfunction to find docket number SSA-2010-0025. The system will issue a tracking number to confirm your submission. You will not be able to view your comment immediately because we must post each comment manually. It may take up to a week for your comment to be viewable.

Comments are available for public viewing on the Federal eRulemaking portal athttp://www.regulations.govor in person, during regular business hours, by arranging with the contact person identified below.

Claimants may use representatives to help them with their claims for benefits before us. Prior to March 2, 2004, the Act authorized us to withhold 25% of a claimant's past-due benefits under title II of the Act when the claimant hired an attorney representative and to pay the attorney's fees directly from the withheld amounts.1The Social Security Protection Act of 2004 (SSPA) amended section 1631(d)(2) of the Act and authorized us for five years to withhold 25% of a claimant's past-due benefits in claims filed under title XVI of the Act and pay any approved fee directly to the claimant's attorney.2The SSPA also authorized a five-year demonstration project during which we could similarly withhold 25% of the past-due benefits for claims filed under titles II and XVI of the Act and pay fees directly to non-attorney representatives who met specific requirements.3Both SSPA provisions were set to expire on February 28, 2010.4

142 U.S.C. 406.

2Public Law 108-203, section 302. The authority began February 28, 2005.

3Section 303 of the SSPA.

4Sections 302(c)(2) and 303(e)(2) of the SSPA.

The SSPA specified five requirements that a non-attorney representative had to meet to be eligible for direct fee payment. The representative had to:

(1) Have a bachelor's degree from an accredited institution of higher education or have been determined by us to have equivalent qualifications derived from training and work experience;

(2) Pass an examination that we wrote and administered, which tested knowledge of the relevant provisions of the Act and the most recent developments in Social Security Administration (SSA) and court decisions affecting titles II and XVI of the Act;

(3) Secure professional liability insurance, or equivalent insurance, which we determined to be adequate to protect claimants in the event of malpractice by the representative;

(4) Undergo a criminal background check to ensure the representative's fitness to practice before us; and

(5) Demonstrate ongoing completion of qualified courses of continuing education, including education regarding ethics and professional conduct, which were designed to enhance professional knowledge in matters related to entitlement to, or eligibility for, benefits based on disability under titles II and XVI of the Act. The SSPA required that the continuing education courses, and the instructors providing the education courses, meet our prescribed standards.5

5Section 303(b) of the SSPA.

The SSPA also gave us the discretion to add requirements and authorized us to assess reasonable fees to cover our cost of administering the demonstration project requirements.6

6Sections 303(b) and (c) of the SSPA.

We published several notices in theFederal Registerthat solicited public input and described the policies we would use to implement these requirements and the fee assessment.7Using our discretion, we also added a sixth requirement—representational experience. We describe in more detail below how we implemented these requirements under the SSPA.

We also published interim final rules and final rules to include information in our regulations about the SSPA, such as the demonstration project, the withholding and direct fee payment provisions for non-attorney representatives, direct fee payment to attorney representatives under title XVI of the Act, and the SSPA's five-year sunset date of February 28, 2010.8

On February 27, 2010, Congress enacted the PRA and revised the Act in two main ways.9First, it permanently extended our authority to withhold 25% of a claimant's past-due benefits and directly pay any authorized fees to attorney representatives for claims filed under title XVI of the Act.10To accommodate this change, we are revising our rules in final sections 416.1530 to remove the sunset date and making other conforming changes.

9Public Law 111-142.

10Section 2 of the PRA.

Second, the PRA permanently extended our authority to withhold 25% of past-due benefits and directly pay any authorized fees to eligible non-attorney representatives under titles II and XVI of the Act.11The PRA includes nearly identical language to the SSPA about the five mandatory requirements for direct fee payment, our discretion to add requirements, and our ability to assess representatives a reasonable fee to cover the cost of administration. Based upon our experience with the demonstration project, in these interim final rules we are modifying how we implement these provisions to help non-attorney representatives more easily understand and comply with our requirements and process.

11Section 3 of the PRA.

The following information explains how we have been implementing the SSPA's requirements, how we will implement the PRA, and the revisions we are making to our rules.

Application Process

To implement the requirements of the SSPA, we required non-attorneys who wanted to receive direct fee payment to apply with us. We held one application period per year through 2009, except for the first year when we held two application periods. We required any non-attorney representative who wanted to be eligible to receive direct fee payment to complete an application, submit the required documentation, and pay the application fee. We required applicants to postmark their applications by the last day of the application period. We also gave applicants who timely paid the application fee 6 weeks to cure defects in an incomplete application. After we verified that all other requirements had been met, we permitted the applicant to take our written examination.

We allowed an applicant who did not complete the application in a timely manner, pay the application fee, or pass the examination, to reapply during any subsequent application period. However, we required the applicant to complete an application, pay an application fee, and meet the requirements each time he or she reapplied to take the examination.

We have decided to change two of our procedures in order to streamline the application process. As explained above, we previously verified that each applicant met the education or equivalent qualifications, insurance, and criminal background check requirements before we permitted him or her to take the examination. Under these rules, an applicant must indicate that he or she meets the education or equivalent qualification requirement and pass the criminal background check before we permit the applicant to take the examination. However, we will not request documentation or verify that an applicant meets the education or equivalent qualifications and insurance requirements until after he or she takes and passes the examination. This change will help us save resources because we will not need to verify information about applicants whom wedetermine, based on information in their applications, to be ineligible to take the examination, or who do not pass the examination.

Second, instead of the 6-week time period we currently give an applicant to cure defects in his or her application, we will make this process consistent with our protest procedures and give an applicant 10 calendar days from the date we notify him or her that there is a defect in the application to correct the problem. We will permit only an applicant who both timely submits the application and timely pays the application fee to cure defects in his or her application. We are making this change because we will require an applicant to provide less documentation before he or she passes the examination under these rules.

We are adding these requirements in final sections 404.1717(a)(1), (b), and (f) and 416.1517(a)(1), (b), and (f).

Application Fee

Both the SSPA and the PRA allow us to assess reasonable fees to cover the cost of administering the requirements for non-attorney representative eligibility for direct fee payment, such as the cost of administering the written examination and conducting criminal background checks.12After Congress enacted the SSPA, we published two notices in theFederal Registerthat explained how we administered the application fee process.13

12Section 303(c) of the SSPA and section 3(a) of the PRA.

1370 FR 2448 and 70 FR at 41252.

We set the fee at $1,000 per applicant, specified the means of payment, and required applicants to pay the fee when they submitted their applications. We would refund or apply the fee to a subsequent application period in two circumstances:

• If the contractor who administered the demonstration project for us was at fault for failing to administer an examination and an applicant did not take the rescheduled examination; or

• If circumstances beyond the applicant's control, such as a death in the applicant's immediate family, a documented illness of the applicant, or a transportation problem that could not have been reasonably anticipated and planned for, prevented an applicant from taking a scheduled examination.

We would not refund or credit a fee to a subsequent application if an applicant:

• Took and failed the examination; or

• Failed to arrive on time for an examination because of circumstances within the applicant's control, such as a traffic problem or a child-care problem of a type that could have been anticipated and planned for.

Our action about whether to provide a refund or apply a fee to a future application period was final and not subject to further review.

Most of these requirements have worked well, and we are adding them in final sections 404.1717(a)(2) and (c) and 416.1517(a)(2) and (c).

However, we are making three changes to our current procedures. First, we will refund the application fee instead of applying the fee to a subsequent application if: (1) We fail to administer a scheduled examination and an applicant is unable to take the rescheduled examination, or (2) we agree that circumstances beyond the applicant's control that could not have been reasonably anticipated and planned for prevented the applicant from taking a scheduled examination. This change will give applicants use of the money until they apply again, and it will help us administer the direct fee payment program more efficiently. Second, we are no longer going to use the “principles of fairness and sound management” test to determine when to refund an application fee. Instead, we will consider an applicant's individual circumstances. Examples of circumstances that we may consider to be beyond an applicant's control that cannot reasonably be anticipated or planned for include a death in the applicant's immediate family or the documented illness of the applicant or the applicant's immediate family member. However, we will not refund the application fee if: (1) An applicant took and failed the examination, or (2) an applicant failed to arrive on time for the examination because of circumstances within the applicant's control that could have been anticipated and planned for. Finally, these interim final rules do not specify the application fee amount. If we decide to change the current application fee of $1,000, we will notify the public through appropriate methods and may announce the changes on our Web site:http://www.socialsecurity.gov/representation. We will notify applicants of any change in the application fee amount in the application package.

Education or Equivalent Qualifications

For a non-attorney representative to receive direct fee payment, the SSPA and the PRA both require either that a representative have “a bachelor's degree from an accredited institution of higher education,” or that we determine that the representative has “equivalent qualifications derived from training and work experience.”14After the SSPA, we published a notice in theFederal Registerthat explained how we would administer this requirement.15We stated how we would determine that an applicant who did not have a qualifying bachelor's degree could meet the equivalent qualifications requirement by using a formula that balanced the applicant's years of education and his or her relevant professional experience:

14Section 303(b)(1) of the SSPA and section 3(a) of the PRA.

1570 FR at 2448-49.

• If the applicant did not have a bachelor's degree, but had three years or more of undergraduate study at an accredited institution of higher learning, the applicant must have had at least one year of relevant professional experience, at least six months of which must have involved claims for benefits under title II or XVI of the Act;

• If the applicant had at least two, but less than three years of undergraduate study at an accredited institution of higher learning, the applicant must have had at least two years of relevant professional experience, at least one year of which must have involved claims for benefits under title II or XVI of the Act;

• If the applicant had at least one, but less than two years of undergraduate study at an accredited institution of higher learning, the applicant must have had at least three years of relevant professional experience, at least two years of which must have involved claims for benefits under title II or XVI of the Act; or

• If the applicant had less than one year of undergraduate study at an accredited institution of higher learning, or no undergraduate education, the applicant must have received a high school diploma or a General Educational Development (GED) certificate and have had at least four years of relevant professional experience, at least two years of which must have involved claims for benefits under title II or XVI of the Act.16

1670 R at 2448-2449. Applicants who possessed a juris doctor degree could only participate in the demonstration project if they did not qualify to receive direct fee payment as attorneys under 42 U.S.C. 406 and 1383.

We also considered relevant professional experience to be work through which the applicant demonstrated familiarity with medical reports and the ability to describe and assess mental or physical limitations. We stated that applicants could gainthis kind of experience in fields such as teaching, counseling or guidance, social work, personnel management, public employment service, nursing, or health care professions. We also considered relevant professional experience to include work involving claims for benefits under title II or XVI of the Act. We asked applicants to show that they met this requirement before they took the examination.

We have found it cumbersome to administer this formula for balancing years of education and relevant professional experience. To help simplify the application process, we have decided not to use this formula. Instead, we will now require applicants to demonstrate that they have either:

• A bachelor's degree from an accredited institution of higher learning, or

• At least four years of relevant professional experience and either a high school diploma or GED certificate.

We will continue to consider relevant professional experience to be work through which the applicant demonstrates familiarity with medical reports and the ability to describe and assess mental or physical limitations. As in the past, an applicant may gain this kind of experience in fields such as teaching, counseling or guidance, social work, personnel management, public employment service, nursing, or health care professions. We will also continue to consider relevant professional experience to include work involving claims for benefits under title II or XVI of the Act.

We will ask for proof of an applicant's education, appropriate training, or work experience after the applicant passes the examination. The kinds of proof we may accept include, but are not limited to, copies of an official education transcript, copies of an Internal Revenue Service Form W-2 (Wage and Tax Statement), or letters from an applicant's employer verifying the length and type of employment.

We are adding these requirements in final sections 404.1717(a)(3) and 416.1517(a)(3).

Written Examination

For a non-attorney representative to receive direct fee payment, the SSPA and the PRA both require the representative to pass an examination that we write and administer that “tests [a representative's] knowledge of the relevant provisions of [the] Act and the most recent developments in [SSA] and court decisions affecting [titles II and XVI of the Act].”17

17Section 303(b)(2) of the SSPA and section 3(a) of the PRA.

After the SSPA, we published a notice in theFederal Registerthat explained how we would administer this requirement.18We said that we would administer written examinations that included 40-50 multiple-choice questions in English only. We offered two examinations during the first year of the demonstration project. From 2006 through 2009, we offered the test once per year on a weekday. The test-takers had open-book access to reference materials that we supplied, such as the most recent edition of the Compilation of the Social Security Laws, Volume 1, and our regulations in 20 CFR chapter III. We based the examinations on situations arising from the subject areas in the reference materials and considered a score of 70 to be passing. We allowed an applicant who failed the examination to reapply to take the examination during a subsequent application period and provided an applicant with the opportunity to protest a failing score.

1870 FR at 2450.

We are adding the requirement that a non-attorney representative take and pass our written examination in final sections 404.1717(a)(5) and 416.1517(a)(5). However, we will specify the details of how we administer the examination, the contents of the examination, and our scoring procedures through other means of communication, such as on our Web site.

While we do not anticipate changing how we administer the examination requirement at this time, we may change this process in the future without publishing a notice in theFederal Register. We will notify the public and applicants of any relevant changes through alternate methods, such as through our Web site:http://www.socialsecurity.gov/representation.

Liability Insurance

For a non-attorney representative to receive direct fee payment, both the SSPA and the PRA require that the representative “secure[] professional liability insurance, or equivalent insurance, which [we determine] to be adequate to protect claimants in the event of malpractice by the representative.”19

19Section 303(b)(3) of the SPA and section 3 of the PRA.

In theFederal Registernotices that we published after Congress passed the SSPA, we explained how we would administer this requirement.20At first, we required applicants to have a minimum total annual amount of coverage of $1 million (for all incidents in that year), plus coverage of $250,000 per incident for coverage of errors and omissions committed by the non-attorney representative. We later reduced the per-incident minimum coverage to $100,000 per incident and decided to consider business liability insurance as professional liability insurance. For professional liability insurance, we also changed the minimum annual aggregate amount to $500,000. For business liability insurance, we set the minimum annual aggregate amount in accordance with the following schedule:

2070 FR at 2449 and 70 FR at 41251.

Number of covered employeesMinimum aggregate amount1 to 10$500,000.11 to 25$1 million.26 to 50$2 million.51 to 100$3 million.101 to 200$4 million.201 or more$5 million.

We believed that these insurance coverage amounts would adequately protect claimants in the event of malpractice by non-attorney representatives, while increasing the ability of non-attorney representatives who wished to participate in the demonstration project to obtain insurance. We also stated that these amounts were consistent with insurance agency practices and standards, which emphasized the per-incident coverage and relied on graduated schedules in increasing minimum aggregate amounts.

Under these procedures, a non-attorney representative must use a firm licensed to provide insurance in the State in which the non-attorney representative conducts business to underwrite the insurance policy. We also required the policy to provide coverage for liability insurance claims made in those States in which the non-attorney representative represents claimants before us. We required an applicant to submit proof that he or she had the required insurance coverage before the application period closed to be able to take the examination. We also required non-attorney representatives who established eligibility to participate in the demonstration project to maintain their insurance coverage to continue to be eligible to receive direct fee payment.

We have found some of the current requirements to be ineffective because some representatives have canceledtheir insurance coverage without informing us. To help ensure that non-attorney representatives maintain adequate liability insurance, we are revising how we will apply this requirement.

We will now require non-attorney representatives who want to receive direct fee payment to provide their initial proof of insurance coverage after passing the examination. We will, at various times, request that representatives provide proof that they have maintained professional or business liability insurance coverage in amounts we prescribe. If we find that a representative has not maintained continuous coverage since our last verification, the representative will be ineligible for direct fee payment for at least 6 full calendar months. We provide more details about this in theIneligibility and Protest Proceduressection, below.

We are revising our rules to require that each eligible non-attorney representative “[p]rovides proof of and maintains continuous liability insurance coverage in an amount we prescribe” in final sections 404.1717(a)(6) and 416.1517(a)(6). We will specify the amount of required insurance coverage in our subregulatory instructions and periodically adjust the required coverage amounts to protect claimants adequately. We are continuing to require representatives to have professional or business liability insurance coverage in the same amounts listed earlier. However, we may change these amounts each year. If we change them in the future, we will announce the changes by the end of any examination application period for that year. We will notify the public of any relevant changes through alternate methods, such as through our Web site:http://www.socialsecurity.gov/representation.

Criminal Background Check

For a non-attorney representative to receive direct fee payment, the SSPA and the PRA both require that a “representative has undergone a criminal background check to ensure the representative's fitness to practice before [us].”21

21Section 303(b)(4) of the SSPA and section 3 of the PRA.

After the SSPA, we published a notice in theFederal Registerthat explained how we would administer this requirement.22Under those procedures, we would reject any applicant who:

2270 FR at 2449.

• Had been suspended or disqualified from practice before us;

• Had a judgment or lien assessed against him or her by a civil court for malpractice or fraud;

• Had a felony conviction;

• Engaged in substantial misrepresentation in submitting his or her application or supporting materials for the application;

• Failed to provide documentation as requested by our contractor to perform the criminal background investigation.

We will continue to follow most of these requirements. However, we are not continuing with the disqualifying standard: “Engages in substantial misrepresentation in submitting his or her application or supporting materials for the application.” Instead, we will require an applicant to attest under penalty of perjury that he or she “[h]as not misrepresented information provided on his or her application or supporting materials for the application.”

We are making this change to clarify that we will not accept even minor misrepresentations by applicants. We also are not stating that a contractor will conduct the criminal background investigation because we may not use a contractor in the future. We are clarifying that a representative must continue to meet the criteria in the criminal background check at all times to remain eligible to receive direct fee payment. All other current requirements will remain in effect.

We are adding these requirements in final sections 404.1717(a)(4) and 416.1517(a)(4), 404.1714(d) and 416.1517(d).

Continuing Education

For a non-attorney representative to receive direct fee payment, both the SSPA and the PRA require that a “representative demonstrate[] ongoing completion of qualified courses of continuing education, including education regarding ethics and professional conduct, which are designed to enhance professional knowledge in matters related to entitlement to, or eligibility for, benefits based on disability under [titles II and XVI of the Act. The] continuing education, and the instructors providing such education, [must] meet [the] standards [that we] prescribe.”23

23Section 303(b)(5) of the SSPA and section 3 of the PRA.

After the SSPA, we published a notice in theFederal Registerthat explained how we would administer this requirement.24We stated that we would generally defer to organizations providing courses as to the subject matter, the requirements for receiving credit for an hour of instruction, and the qualifications of instructors. However, we reserved the right to reject specific courses or instructors if we determined that a course or instructor was unacceptable. We created a framework in which we required certain hours of continuing education requirements during certain time periods, depending on how long a representative participated in the demonstration project and whether the representative was a course instructor. We required eligible non-attorney representatives to report their continuing education information to us, and we specified which information to report.

2470 FR 41250-41251.

We have found the framework that balanced hours and length of participation to be unnecessarily complex for representatives to follow and for us to administer. We also believe that some of the continuing education courses lacked sufficient substance. To help ensure that non-attorney representatives receive pertinent and adequate continuing education, we are revising our rules to require that each non-attorney representative who is eligible to receive direct fee payment “[c]ompletes and provides proof that he or she has completed all continuing education courses that we prescribe by the deadlines we prescribe” in final sections 404.1717(a)(7) and 416.1517(a)(7). We will no longer follow our prior formula to calculate continuing education hour requirements. Instead, we will prescribe which courses representatives must take, and we will select courses that we deem necessary to enhance the representative's professional knowledge in matters such as those related to entitlement to benefits, ethics, the Listing of Impairments,25and other disability topics under titles II and XVI of the Act. We will also prescribe when representatives must complete the courses and how representatives will certify that they have completed the courses. We will notify the public and eligible non-attorney representatives about specific course requirements. We will notify the public of any relevant changes through alternate methods, such as through our Web site:http://www.socialsecurity.gov/representation.

2520 CFR part 404 subpart P appendix 1, which also applies to title XVI of the Act under 20 CFR 416.925.

If a representative does not take the prescribed continuing education courses or provide us with the necessary proofthat he or she has completed the prescribed courses, the representative will be ineligible for direct fee payment for at least 6 full calendar months. We provide more details about this in theIneligibility and Protest Proceduressection, below.

Representational Experience

The SSPA gave us discretion to establish additional requirements for non-attorneys to receive direct fee payment.26We published two notices in theFederal Registerin which we explained an additional requirement that non-attorney representatives have certain minimum representational experience.27We stated that each applicant must show that he or she represented at least five claimants before us within a 24-month period within the 60 months before the month in which the applicant filed the application. We also described the types of work that would qualify, and we provided examples of how we would calculate the 24- and 60-month periods.

26Section 303(b) of the SSPA.

2770 FR at 2449 and 70 FR at 41252.

Although the PRA also gives us discretion to establish additional requirements,28we have decided not to continue with the representational experience requirement. We found that this requirement unnecessarily complicated the application process without adding significant benefit. In our experience administering the demonstration project, we found that passing the written examination is a better barometer to assess representatives' knowledge and skills.

28Section 3(a) of the PRA.

Ineligibility and Protest Procedures

Both the SSPA and the PRA require that non-attorney representatives meet the requirements listed above before we determine that they are eligible to receive direct fee payment.29Once we determine that a non-attorney representative is eligible to receive direct fee payment, he or she must continue to meet all of the requirements.

29Section 303(b) of the SSPA and section 3(a) of the PRA.

After the SSPA, we published a notice in theFederal Registerthat explained how an applicant could protest our action finding that he or she was ineligible to take the examination or receive direct fee payment.30We stated that we would notify non-attorney representatives in these situations.

3070 FR at 41252.

If an applicant timely paid the application fee but submitted an incomplete application, we would notify the applicant and give him or her 6 weeks after the close of the application period to cure the defects. If we determined that an applicant was not qualified to take the examination for reasons other than failure to pay the application fee, such as failing the criminal background investigation, we also would notify the applicant. The applicant could protest our action within 10 calendar days of the date of our notice and use the protest period to correct the defects in his or her application. We also allowed an applicant to file a protest with us if he or she failed the examination.

As stated above, we required eligible non-attorney representatives to continue to meet the requirements to continue to receive direct fee payment.

If we notified an eligible representative that we proposed to suspend direct fee payment because he or she failed to meet our continuing education requirement, we gave the representative 10 calendar days to protest our action and show that he or she met this requirement. If there was no protest, the suspension began on the first day of the month following the month in which the protest period ended. If there was a protest and we still found that the representative was ineligible, we began suspending direct fee payment on the first day of the month following the month in which we notified the representative about our action in response to the protest. We would end the suspension the month after the month we determined that he or she completed all of the unmet requirements.

Similarly, if we notified an eligible representative that we proposed to suspend direct fee payment because he or she failed to meet our insurance coverage requirements, we gave the representative 15 calendar days to protest our action and show that he or she met this requirement. If there was no protest, the suspension began on the first day of the month following the month in which the protest period ended. If there was a protest and we decided that the representative was ineligible, we began suspending direct fee payment on the first day of the month following the month in which we notified the representative about our action in response to the protest. We would end the suspension on the first day of the month following the month in which we notified the representative that he or she again met our requirements.

We stated that every protest must include supporting facts and complete documentation. Our action in response to a protest was final and not subject to further review. We also said that we would not withhold or make direct fee payment to a non-attorney representative in any case in which we effectuated a determination or decision while the suspension is in effect.

In these interim final rules, we are also adding rules about how we handle protests when we determine that a non-attorney representative is not eligible to receive direct fee payment. Our experience administering the demonstration project showed that we could improve upon our protest procedures to make them easier to understand, follow, and administer.

Because it is easier to administer a uniform process, we will now require that a representative submit his or her protest in writing, and we will limit all protests to 10 calendar days from the date he or she receives notice of our action finding him or her ineligible. Our action in response to a protest will remain final and will not be subject to further review.

We will no longer allow applicants to protest failing examination scores. We use several checks to verify the accuracy of scores. Our experience shows that we confirmed all previously protested test scores as being accurate; therefore, we denied all test score protests that applicants filed. As stated earlier, we will allow a representative who fails the examination to reapply during a subsequent application period, but a representative must complete a new application and pay the application fee each time he or she reapplies.

If an applicant does not attest that he or she meets our education or equivalent qualifications requirement and we find that the applicant is ineligible to take the examination because this requirement is not met, we will continue to allow the applicant to protest this finding. If an applicant files a protest and we confirm our earlier finding, we will not allow the applicant to sit for the examination. We will allow the applicant to reapply in a subsequent application period. As stated earlier, an applicant must complete a new application and pay the application fee each time he or she reapplies. As also stated earlier, we will now verify the education or equivalent qualifications requirement after applicants take and pass the examination.

If an applicant takes and passes the examination, but we find that the applicant provided false or misleading information about his or her education or equivalent qualification, we will find that the applicant is ineligible to receive direct fee payment. We will provide the representative with the opportunity to protest our finding. If the representative does not protest, we will make therepresentative permanently ineligible to receive direct fee payment. If the representative protests and we confirm our earlier finding, we will make the representative permanently ineligible to receive direct fee payment. We may also refer the information to our Office of the General Counsel so it can decide if we should bring sanctions against the representative.

If we find that an applicant does not meet our criminal background check (including a check of our administrative records) and is ineligible to take the examination, we will allow the applicant to protest this finding. If an applicant files a protest and we confirm our earlier finding, we will not allow the applicant to take the examination.

An applicant who passes our written examination will only become eligible to receive direct fee payment when he or she provides proof of sufficient liability insurance in an amount we prescribe and provides proof of education or equivalent qualifications. We will not allow an applicant to protest our finding that he or she has not yet provided this documentation. In this situation, an applicant will become eligible to receive direct fee payment once he or she provides this proof, assuming that he or she continues to meet all other eligibility requirements.

We will continue to monitor whether eligible non-attorney representatives meet our requirements and remain eligible to receive direct fee payment. We may find a representative is ineligible to receive direct fee payment if he or she: (1) Provided false or misleading information about his or her bachelor's degree or equivalent qualifications; (2) would fail our criminal background check if conducted today; (3) has not provided sufficient proof of maintaining continuous liability insurance; or (4) has not completed or provided documentation of the required continuing education courses. As stated above, we will send a notice to the representative that states what action we will take and the applicable protest procedures.

If we find that an eligible non-attorney representative provided false or misleading information about his or her bachelor's degree or equivalent qualifications, or would fail our criminal background check if conducted today, we will provide the representative with the opportunity to protest our finding. If the representative does not protest, we will make the representative permanently ineligible to receive direct fee payment beginning with the month after the month the protest period ends. If the representative protests and we confirm our earlier finding, we will make the representative permanently ineligible to receive direct fee payment the month after the month we uphold our finding. We may also refer the information to our Office of the General Counsel so it can decide if we should bring sanctions against the representative.

If we find that an eligible non-attorney representative has not completed or provided documentation of the required continuing education courses, we will also provide the representative with the opportunity to protest our finding. If the representative does not protest, the representative will be ineligible for direct fee payment for 6 full calendar months beginning with the month after the month the protest period ends. If the representative protests and the action we take in response to the protest confirms our earlier finding, we will make the representative ineligible for direct fee payment for 6 full calendar months beginning with the month after the month we uphold our finding. After the 6-month suspension period is over, we will resume direct fee payment to the representative in the first month after the month we find that he or she demonstrates that he or she meets our continuing education requirements. A representative may submit this required documentation at any time during or after the end of the 6-month suspension.

We will also provide an eligible representative with the opportunity to protest our action if we find that a non-attorney representative has not provided sufficient proof that he or she had maintained the continuous liability insurance coverage. If the representative does not protest, the representative will be ineligible for direct fee payment for 6 full calendar months beginning with the month after the month the protest period ends. If the representative protests and the action we take in response to the protest confirms our earlier finding, we will make the representative ineligible for direct fee payment for 6 full calendar months beginning with the month after the month we uphold our finding. The non-attorney representative may provide us with documentation that he or she maintains the required liability insurance coverage no earlier than in the sixth month of the suspension. After the 6-month suspension period is over, we will resume direct fee payment to the representative in the first month after the month we find that the non-attorney representative again maintains the required liability insurance coverage.

We are adding these requirements in final sections 404.903, 404.1717(d) and (e), 416.1403, and 416.1517(d) and (e).

Currently Ineligible Non-Attorney Representatives

Some non-attorney representatives who became eligible for direct fee payment during the demonstration project are currently suspended from eligibility because they did not maintain the required liability insurance coverage or meet our continuing education requirements. Prior to the effective date of these interim final rules, we may end their suspensions under the current requirements if they provide the necessary proof to us. After the effective date of these interim final rules, we will notify those non-attorney representatives who did not provide sufficient proof and inform them of our new requirements. We will allow these representatives to protest their suspensions under the protest procedures explained in these rules.

Because we are not changing the amount of insurance coverage we currently require, a representative who protests our finding that he or she failed to maintain the required liability insurance must provide documentation showing proof of coverage in the amount listed above. A representative who protests our finding that he or she did not meet our continuing education requirements must provide documentation showing that he or she met our requirements under the demonstration project prior to the effective date of these rules. If the action we take in response to the protest confirms our earlier finding, we will make the representative ineligible for direct fee payment for 6 full calendar months beginning with the month after the month we uphold our finding.

Other Changes

We are adding a definition for “eligible non-attorney” in final sections 404.1703 and 416.1503 and defining this term to mean “a non-attorney representative who we determine is qualified to receive direct payment of his or her fee under [20 CFR 404.1717(a) or 416.1517(a)].” We are also adding a definition for “date we notify him or her” in final sections 404.1703 and 416.1503 and defining this phrase to mean “5 days after the date on the notice, unless the recipient shows us that he or she did not receive it within the 5-day period.” We also clarify in final sections 404.1717 and 416.1517 that an individual who is a licensed attorney or is suspended or disbarred from the practice of law in any jurisdiction cannot be an eligible non-attorney. Finally, we are making conforming changes to final sections 404.1720, 404.1730, 416.1520, and 416.1530 for clarity.

Regulatory Procedures

Pursuant to sections 205(a), 702(a)(5), and 1631(d)(1) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. 405(a), 902(a)(5), 1383(d)(1), we follow the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) rulemaking procedures specified in 5 U.S.C. 553 in the development of our regulations. The APA provides exceptions to its prior notice and public comment procedures when a Federal agency finds there is good cause for dispensing with such procedures on the basis that they are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.

With regard to these rules, we find that good cause exists under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B) to issue these regulatory changes as interim final rules without prior public comment. Congress enacted the PRA on February 27, 2010, and the statute required us to “provide for full implementation * * * not later than March 1, 2010.”31Our regulations about withholding for direct fee payment to attorneys and eligible non-attorney representatives under title XVI of the Act and direct fee payment to eligible non-attorney representatives under titles II and XVI of the Act expired on February 28, 2010. In light of the effective date of the changes contained in the PRA, we find it is impracticable not to have implementing regulations while we initiate notice and comment rulemaking proceedings. However, we are inviting public comment on the changes made by these interim final rules and will consider any responsive comments received within 60 days of publication.

31Section 3(c) of the PRA.

Executive Order 12866, as Supplemented by Executive Order 13563

We consulted with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and determined that these interim final rules meet the criteria for a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, as supplemented by Executive Order 13563. Therefore, OMB reviewed them.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

We certify that these interim final rules will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because they affect individuals only. Therefore, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended, does not require us to prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis.

Paperwork Reduction Act

These final rules contain public reporting requirements in the regulation sections listed below. We are seeking approval for these regulation sections under OMB Control Number 0960-0699, which we will use to collect the information required by these sections. Below we provide burden estimates for the public reporting requirements.

Regulation sectionDescription of public reporting

requirement

Number of

respondents

(annually)

Frequency of responseAverage

burden per

response

(minutes)

Estimated

annual

burden *

404.1717(a)(5); 416.1517(a)(5)New Respondents Examination2001120400404.1717(a)(3); 416.1517(a)(3)New Respondents—Submission of proof of Bachelor's Degree or Equivalent Qualifications20011033404.1717(a)(7); 416.1517(a)(7)New and Existing Respondents—CE Submission via e-mail/mail/or FAX of training courses taken as prescribed by SSA710120237404.1717(a)(6); 416.1517(a)(6)New and Existing Respondents—Proof of Continuous Professional or Business Liability Insurance Coverage (Scan and E-mail)672110112404.1717(a)(6); 416.1517(a)(6)New and Existing Respondents—Proof of Continuous Professional or Business Liability Insurance Coverage (Copy and Mail)3811510404.1717(d); 416.1517(d)New and Existing Respondents—Written Protests4514534Totals1,865826We submitted an Information Collection Request for clearance to OMB. We are soliciting comments on the burden estimate; the need for the information; its practical utility; ways to enhance its quality, utility, and clarity; and ways to minimize the burden on respondents, including the use of automated techniques or other forms of information technology. If you would like to submit comments, please send them to the following locations:Office of Management and Budget,Attn:Desk Officer for SSA.Fax Number:202-395-6974.E-mail address: OIRA_Submission@omb.eop.gov.Social Security Administration, Attn: Reports Clearance Officer, 1333 Annex, 6401 Security Blvd, Baltimore, MD 21235-0001.Fax Number:410-965-6400.E-mail: OPLM.RCO@ssa.gov.

You can submit comments until September 26, 2011, which is 60 days after the publication of these rules. However, your comments will be most useful if you send them to us by August 29, 2011, which is 30 days after publication. To receive a copy of the OMB clearance package, contact the SSA Reports Clearance Officer using any of the above contact methods. We prefer to receive comments by e-mail or fax.

(a)Criteria for eligibility.An individual who is a licensed attorney or who is suspended or disbarred from the practice of law in any jurisdiction may not be an eligible non-attorney. A non-attorney representative is eligible to receive direct payment of his or her fee out of your past-due benefits if he or she:

(1) Completes and submits to us an application as described in paragraph (b) of this section;

(2) Pays the application fee as described in paragraph (c) of this section;

(3) Demonstrates that he or she possesses:

(i) A bachelor's degree from an accredited institution of higher learning; or

(ii) At least four years of relevant professional experience and either a high school diploma or a General Educational Development certificate;

(4) Passes our criminal background investigation (including checks of our administrative records), and attests under penalty of perjury that he or she:

(i) Has not been suspended or disqualified from practice before us and is not suspended or disbarred from the practice of law in any jurisdiction;

(ii) Has not had a judgment or lien assessed against him or her by a civil court for malpractice or fraud;

(iii) Has not had a felony conviction; and

(iv) Has not misrepresented information provided on his or her application or supporting materials for the application;

(5) Takes and passes a written examination we administer;

(6) Provides proof of and maintains continuous liability insurance coverage in an amount we prescribe; and

(7) Completes and provides proof that he or she has completed all continuing education courses that we prescribe by the deadline we prescribe.

(b)Application.An applicant must timely submit his or her completed application form during an application period that we prescribe. The application must be postmarked by the last day of the application period. If an applicant timely submits the application fee and a defective application, we will give the applicant 10 calendar days after the date we notify him or her of the defect to correct the application.

(c)Application fee.An applicant must timely submit his or her application fee during the application period. We will set the fee annually.

(1) We will refund the fee if:

(i) We do not administer an examination, and an applicant was unable to take the rescheduled examination; or

(ii) Circumstances beyond the applicant's control that could not have been reasonably anticipated and planned for prevent an applicant from taking a scheduled examination.

(2) We will not refund the fee if:

(i) An applicant took and failed the examination; or

(ii) An applicant failed to arrive on time for the examination because of circumstances within the applicant's control that could have been anticipated and planned for.

(d)Protest procedures.

(1) We may find that a non-attorney representative is ineligible to receive direct fee payment at any time because he or she fails to meet any of the criteria in paragraph (a) of this section. A non-attorney representative whom we find to be ineligible for direct fee payment may protest our finding only if we based it on the representative's failure to:

(i) Attest on the application or provide sufficient documentation that he or she possesses the required education or equivalent qualifications, as described in paragraph (a)(3) of this section;

(ii) Meet at all times the criminal background investigation criteria, as described in paragraph (a)(4) of this section

(iii) Provide proof that he or she has maintained continuous liability insurance coverage, as described in paragraph (a)(6) of this section, after we previously determined the representative was eligible to receive direct fee payment; or

(iv) Complete continuing education courses or provide documentation of the required continuing education courses, as described in paragraph (a)(7) of this section.

(2) A non-attorney representative who wants to protest our finding under paragraph (d)(1) of this section must file a protest in writing and provide all relevant supporting documentation to us within 10 calendar days after the date we notify him or her of our finding.

(3) A representative may not file a protest for reasons other than those listed in paragraph (d)(1) of this section. If a representative files a protest for reasons other than those listed in paragraph (d)(1) of this section, we will not process the protest and will implement our finding as if no protest had been filed. Our finding in response to the protest is final and not subject to further review.

(e)Ineligibility and suspension.

(1) If an applicant does not protest, in accordance with paragraph (d)(2) of this section, our finding about the criteria in paragraphs (a)(3) or (a)(4) of this section, the applicant will be either ineligible to take the written examination for which he or she applied or ineligible to receive direct fee payment if the applicant already took and passed the examination prior to our finding. If an applicant protests in accordance with paragraph (d)(2) of this section and we uphold our finding, the applicant will be either ineligible to take the written examination for which he or she applied or ineligible to receive direct fee payment if the applicant already took and passed the examination prior to our finding.

(2) If an eligible non-attorney representative does not protest, in accordance with paragraph (d)(2) of this section, our finding about the criteria in paragraphs (a)(3) or (a)(4) of this section, the non-attorney representative will be ineligible to receive direct fee payment beginning with the month after the month the protest period ends. If the eligible non-attorney representative protests in accordance with paragraph (d)(2) of this section and we uphold our finding, the non-attorney representative will be ineligible to receive direct fee payment beginning with the month after the month we uphold our finding.

(3) If an eligible non-attorney representative does not protest, in accordance with paragraph (d)(2) of this section, our finding about the criteria in paragraph (a)(6) of this section, the non-attorney representative will be ineligible to receive direct fee payment for 6 full calendar months beginning with the month after the month the protest period ends. If the eligible non-attorney representative protests in accordance with paragraph (d)(2) of this section and we uphold our finding, the non-attorney representative will be ineligible to receive direct fee payment for 6 full calendar months beginning with the month after the month we uphold our finding. In either case, the non-attorney representative may provide us with documentation that he or she has acquired and maintains the required liability insurance coverage described in paragraph (a)(6) of this section, no earlier than the sixth month of the ineligibility. The non-attorney representative will again be eligible to receive direct fee payment beginning in the first month after the month we find that we have received sufficient documentation that the non-attorney representative meets the requirements of paragraph (a)(6) of this section.

(4) If an eligible non-attorney representative does not protest, in accordance with paragraph (d)(2) of this section, our finding about the criteria in paragraph (a)(7) of this section, the non-attorney representative will be ineligible to receive direct fee payment for 6 full calendar months beginning with the month after the month the protest period ends. If the eligible non-attorney representative protests in accordance with paragraph (d)(2) of this section and we uphold our finding, the non-attorney will be ineligible to receive direct fee payment for 6 full calendar months beginning with the month after the month we uphold our finding. In either case, the non-attorney representative may provide us with documentation that he or she has satisfied the criteria in paragraph (a)(7) of this section at any time. The non-attorney representative will again be eligible to receive direct fee payment beginning in the first month after the month we find that we have received sufficient documentation, but not earlier than the month following the end of the 6 month ineligibility period.

(f)Reapplying.A representative may reapply to become eligible to receive direct fee payment under paragraph (a) of this section during any subsequent application period if he or she:

(1) Did not meet the initial criteria for eligibility in paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3), or (a)(5) of this section in a prior application period; or

(2) Failed to timely correct a defective application in a prior application period, as described in paragraph (b) of this section.

(4) If your representative is an attorney or an eligible non-attorney, and you are entitled to past-due benefits, we will pay the authorized fee, or a part of the authorized fee, directly to the attorney or eligible non-attorney out of the past-due benefits, subject to the limitations described in § 404.1730(b)(1). If the representative is a non-attorney who is ineligible to receive direct fee payment, we assume no responsibility for the payment of any fee that we have authorized.

7. Amend § 404.1730 by revising the first sentence of paragraph (a), heading and introductory text of paragraph (b)(1), heading and the first sentence of paragraph (b)(2), heading of paragraph (c), and paragraph (c)(1) to read as follows:§ 404.1730Payment of fees.

(a)Fees allowed by a Federal court.We will pay an attorney representative out of your past-due benefits the amount of the fee allowed by a Federal court in a proceeding under title II of the Act. * * *

(b)Fees we may authorize—

(1)Attorneys and eligible non-attorneys.Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, if we make a determination or decision in your favor and you were represented by an attorney or an eligible non-attorney, and as a result of the determination or decision you have past-due benefits, we will pay the representative out of the past-due benefits, the smaller of the amounts in paragraph (b)(1)(i) or (ii) of this section, less the amount of the assessment described in paragraph (d) of this section.

(2)Non-attorneys ineligible for direct payment.If the representative is a non-attorney who is ineligible to receive direct payment of his or her fee, we assume no responsibility for the payment of any fee that we authorized. * * *

(c)Time limit for filing request for approval of fee to obtain direct payment.(1) To receive direct fee payment from your past-due benefits, a representative who is an attorney or an eligible non-attorney should file a request for approval of a fee, or written notice of the intent to file a request, at one of our offices, or electronically at the times and in the manner that we prescribe if we give notice that such a method is available, within 60 days of the date we mail the notice of the favorable determination or decision.

PART 416—SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME FOR THE AGED, BLIND, AND DISABLEDSubpart N—[Amended]8. The authority citation for subpart N of part 416 continues to read as follows:Authority:

(a)Criteria for eligibility.An individual who is a licensed attorney or who is suspended or disbarred from the practice of law in any jurisdiction may not be an eligible non-attorney. A non-attorney representative is eligible to receive direct payment of his or her fee out of your past-due benefits if he or she:

(1) Completes and submits to us an application as described in paragraph (b) of this section;

(2) Pays the application fee as described in paragraph (c) of this section;

(3) Demonstrates that he or she possesses:

(i) A bachelor's degree from an accredited institution of higher learning; or

(ii) At least four years of relevant professional experience and either a high school diploma or a General Educational Development certificate;

(4) Passes our criminal background investigation (including checks of our administrative records), and attests under penalty of perjury that he or she:

(i) Has not been suspended or disqualified from practice before us and is not suspended or disbarred from the practice of law in any jurisdiction;

(ii) Has not had a judgment or lien assessed against him or her by a civil court for malpractice or fraud;

(iii) Has not had a felony conviction; and

(iv) Has not misrepresented information provided on his or her application or supporting materials for the application;

(5) Takes and passes a written examination we administer;

(6) Provides proof of and maintains continuous liability insurance coverage in an amount we prescribe; and

(7) Completes and provides proof that he or she has completed all continuing education courses that we prescribe by the deadline we prescribe.

(b)Application.An applicant must timely submit his or her completed application form during an application period that we prescribe. The application must be postmarked by the last day of the application period. If an applicant timely submits the application fee and a defective application, we will give the applicant 10 calendar days after the date we notify him or her of the defect to correct the application.

(c)Application fee.An applicant must timely submit his or her application fee during the application period. We will set the fee annually.

(1) We will refund the fee if:

(i) We do not administer an examination, and an applicant was unable to take the rescheduled examination; or

(ii) Circumstances beyond the applicant's control that could not have been reasonably anticipated and planned for prevent an applicant from taking a scheduled examination.

(2) We will not refund the fee if:

(i) An applicant took and failed the examination; or

(ii) An applicant failed to arrive on time for the examination because of circumstances within the applicant's control that could have been anticipated and planned for.

(d)Protest procedures.

(1) We may find that a non-attorney representative is ineligible to receive direct fee payment at any time because he or she fails to meet any of the criteria in paragraph (a) of this section. A non-attorney representative whom we find to be ineligible for direct fee payment may protest our finding only if we based it on the representative's failure to:

(i) Attest on the application or provide sufficient documentation that he or she possesses the required education or equivalent qualifications, as described in paragraph (a)(3) of this section;

(ii) Meet at all times the criminal background investigation criteria, as described in paragraph (a)(4) of this section

(iii) Provide proof that he or she has maintained continuous liability insurance coverage, as described in paragraph (a)(6) of this section, after we previously determined the representative was eligible to receive direct fee payment; or

(iv) Complete continuing education courses or provide documentation of the required continuing education courses, as described in paragraph (a)(7) of this section.

(2) A non-attorney representative who wants to protest our finding under paragraph (d)(1) of this section must file a protest in writing and provide all relevant supporting documentation to us within 10 calendar days after the date we notify him or her of our finding.

(3) A representative may not file a protest for reasons other than those listed in paragraph (d)(1) of this section. If a representative files a protest for reasons other than those listed in paragraph (d)(1) of this section, we will not process the protest and will implement our finding as if no protest had been filed. Our finding in response to the protest is final and not subject to further review.

(e)Ineligibility and suspension.

(1) If an applicant does not protest, in accordance with paragraph (d)(2) of this section, our finding about the criteria in paragraphs (a)(3) or (a)(4) of this section, the applicant will be either ineligible to take the written examination for which he or she applied or ineligible to receive direct fee payment if the applicant already took and passed the examination prior to our finding. If an applicant protests in accordance with paragraph (d)(2) of this section and we uphold our finding, the applicant will be either ineligible to take the written examination for which he or she applied or ineligible to receive direct fee payment if the applicant already took and passed the examination prior to our finding.

(2) If an eligible non-attorney representative does not protest, in accordance with paragraph (d)(2) of this section, our finding about the criteria in paragraphs (a)(3) or (a)(4) of this section, the non-attorney representative will be ineligible to receive direct fee payment beginning with the month after the month the protest period ends. If the eligible non-attorney representative protests in accordance with paragraph(d)(2) of this section and we uphold our finding, the non-attorney representative will be ineligible to receive direct fee payment beginning with the month after the month we uphold our finding.

(3) If an eligible non-attorney representative does not protest, in accordance with paragraph (d)(2) of this section, our finding about the criteria in paragraph (a)(6) of this section, the non-attorney representative will be ineligible to receive direct fee payment for 6 full calendar months beginning with the month after the month the protest period ends. If the eligible non-attorney representative protests in accordance with paragraph (d)(2) of this section and we uphold our finding, the non-attorney representative will be ineligible to receive direct fee payment for 6 full calendar months beginning with the month after the month we uphold our finding. In either case, the non-attorney representative may provide us with documentation that he or she has acquired and maintains the required liability insurance coverage described in paragraph (a)(6) of this section, no earlier than the sixth month of the ineligibility. The non-attorney representative will again be eligible to receive direct fee payment beginning in the first month after the month we find that we have received sufficient documentation that the non-attorney representative meets the requirements of paragraph (a)(6) of this section.

(4) If an eligible non-attorney representative does not protest, in accordance with paragraph (d)(2) of this section, our finding about the criteria in paragraph (a)(7) of this section, the non-attorney representative will be ineligible to receive direct fee payment for 6 full calendar months beginning with the month after the month the protest period ends. If the eligible non-attorney representative protests in accordance with paragraph (d)(2) of this section and we uphold our finding, the non-attorney will be ineligible to receive direct fee payment for 6 full calendar months beginning with the month after the month we uphold our finding. In either case, the non-attorney representative may provide us with documentation that he or she has satisfied the criteria in paragraph (a)(7) of this section at any time. The non-attorney representative will again be eligible to receive direct fee payment beginning in the first month after the month we find that we have received sufficient documentation, but not earlier than the month following the end of the 6 month ineligibility period.

(f)Reapplying.A representative may reapply to become eligible to receive direct fee payment under paragraph (a) of this section during any subsequent application period if he or she:

(1) Did not meet the initial criteria for eligibility in paragraphs (a)(1), (2), (3), and (5) of this section in a prior application period; or

(2) Failed to timely correct a defective application in a prior application period as described in paragraph (b) of this section.

(4) If your representative is an attorney or an eligible non-attorney, and you are entitled to past-due benefits, we will pay the authorized fee, or a part of the authorized fee, directly to the attorney or eligible non-attorney out of the past-due benefits, subject to the limitations described in § 416.1530(b)(1). If the representative is a non-attorney who is ineligible to receive direct fee payment, we assume no responsibility for the payment of any fee that we have authorized.

14. Amend § 416.1530 by revising the first sentence of paragraph (a), heading and introductory text of paragraph (b)(1), heading and the first sentence of paragraph (b)(2), heading of paragraph (c), and paragraph (c)(1) to read as follows:§ 416.1530Payment of fees.

(a)Fees allowed by a Federal court.We will pay an attorney representative out of your past-due benefits the amount of the fee allowed by a Federal court in a proceeding under title XVI of the Act. * * *

(b)Fees we may authorize—

(1)Attorneys and eligible non-attorneys.Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, if we make a determination or decision in your favor and you were represented by an attorney or an eligible non-attorney, and as a result of the determination or decision you have past-due benefits, we will pay the representative out of the past-due benefits, the smallest of the amounts in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through (iii) of this section, less the amount of the assessment described in paragraph (d) of this section.

(2)Non-attorneys ineligible for direct payment.If the representative is a non-attorney who is ineligible to receive direct payment of his or her fee, we assume no responsibility for the payment of any fee that we authorized. * * *

(c)Time limit for filing request for approval of fee to obtain direct payment.(1) To receive direct fee payment from your past-due benefits, a representative who is an attorney or an eligible non-attorney should file a request for approval of a fee, or written notice of the intent to file a request, at one of our offices, or electronically at the times and in the manner that we prescribe if we give notice that such a method is available, within 60 days of the date we mail the notice of the favorable determination or decision.

The Department of State is amending the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) to change the method of payment to electronic submission of registration fees. The institution of the electronic submission of registration fees will simplify the collection and verification of payments, eliminate the need to manually process and collect returned payments, and eliminate the possibility of lost payments. Definitions for “Foreign Ownership” and “Foreign Control” are also added.

The Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) is responsible for the collection of registration fees from persons in the business of manufacturing, exporting,and/or brokering defense articles or defense services.

Previously, registrants submitted registration fees to DDTC by check or money order, and these payments were processed manually. The institution of the electronic submission of registration fees will simplify the collection and verification of payments, eliminate the need to manually process and collect returned payments, and eliminate the possibility of lost payments.

Section 122.2(a) is revised to provide for electronic payment as the sole means of registration fee submission. The form used for obtaining registration, the DS-2032 Statement of Registration, has been revised to reflect that fee payments are to be made electronically. Additionally, the certifications previously required through the transmittal letter referenced in § 122.2(b) of the ITAR are incorporated into the revised DS-2032. Consequently, § 122.2(b) no longer requires a separate transmittal letter; rather, it addresses certain certifications to be made on the Statement of Registration that previously were provided via the transmittal letter. The new § 122.2(b) title will be “Statement of Registration Certification.”

Definitions for “ownership” and “control” are removed from part 122 by the removal of § 122.2(c). Definitions for “Foreign Ownership” and “Foreign Control” constitute the new § 120.37.

Section 122.3(a) is revised to remove reference to the transmittal letter.

The revision to § 129.4(a) is in line with the change in part 122 regarding the provision of electronic payment of registration fees. References to the transmittal letter are removed from §§ 129.4(a) and (b).

Title and number of the registration form is corrected in § 120.28(a)(2), and § 123.16(b)(9) is revised to correct a reference to § 122.2(c) and replace it with a reference to § 120.37.

This rule was first presented as a proposed rule for public comment on February 24, 2011. That comment period ended April 25, 2011. No comments pertinent to this rule were received.

Having thoroughly reviewed and evaluated the rule, the Department has determined that it will accept, and hereby does adopt, the proposed rule as a final rule.

Regulatory Analysis and NoticesAdministrative Procedure Act

The Department of State is of the opinion that controlling the import and export of defense articles and services is a foreign affairs function of the United States Government and that rules implementing this function are exempt from § 553 (Rulemaking) and § 554 (Adjudications) of the Administrative Procedure Act. Although the Department is of the opinion that this rule is exempt from the rulemaking provisions of the APA, the Department published this rule with a 60-day provision for public comment and without prejudice to its determination that controlling the import and export of defense services is a foreign affairs function.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

Since this amendment is not subject to the notice-and-comment procedures of 5 U.S.C. 553, it does not require analysis under the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995

This amendment does not involve a mandate that will result in the expenditure by State, local, and Tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100 million or more in any year and it will not significantly or uniquely affect small governments. Therefore, no actions were deemed necessary under the provisions of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995.

Executive Order 13175

The Department has determined that this rulemaking will not have Tribal implications, will not impose substantial direct compliance costs on Indian Tribal governments, and will not pre-empt Tribal law. Accordingly, the requirements of Executive Order 13175 do not apply to this rulemaking.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996

This amendment has been found not to be a major rule within the meaning of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996.

Executive Orders 12372 and 13132

This amendment will not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in accordance with Executive Order 13132, it is determined that this amendment does not have sufficient federalism implications to require consultations or warrant the preparation of a federalism summary impact statement. The regulations implementing Executive Order 12372 regarding intergovernmental consultation on Federal programs and activities do not apply to this amendment.

Executive Order 12866

The Department of State does not consider this rule to be a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866, section 3(f), Regulatory Planning and Review. The Department is of the opinion that controlling the import and export of defense articles and services is a foreign affairs function of the United States Government and that rules governing the conduct of this function are exempt from the requirements of Executive Order 12866.

Executive Order 13563

The Department of State has considered this rule in light of Executive Order 13563, dated January 18, 2011, and affirms that this regulation is consistent with the guidance therein.

Executive Order 12988

The Department of State has reviewed the amendment in light of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of Executive Order 12988 to eliminate ambiguity, minimize litigation, establish clear legal standards, and reduce burden.

Paperwork Reduction Act

The information collection (IC) requirements for the current Statement of Registration (Department of State form DS-2032) are approved under Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number 1405-0002. This rule imposes new reporting requirements subject to the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. chapter 35. The Department published a notice in theFederal Register(76 FR 10291, with correction at 76 FR 16588) soliciting public comments on the revised information collection and notifying the public that this collection was submitted to OMB for review and approval. No comments pertinent to this rule were received.

Formerly, the ITAR, § 122.2(b), required the respondent to provide separate correspondence (via a “transmittal letter,” to accompany the DS-2032, Statement of Registration, submission) certifying criminal history, eligibility, and foreign ownership. Often, this mandate was overlooked by the respondent, resulting in the return without action of the incomplete application. The revised DS-2032 incorporates these certifications within the form, only requiring the user to click on the appropriate response.

Other changes to the Statement of Registration include additional data fields necessary to match electronic payment to the form. Whereas paymentswill be received electronically, respondents will continue submitting the DS-2032 in paper format. New data elements specific to electronic payment were not previously required on the DS-2032 because such information is visible on U.S. and foreign bank drafts.

Additionally, data elements are added to ensure clarification during analysis as well as standardization of responses. Specifically, necessary information is listed in the form, only requiring the respondent to make a selection by clicking the applicable checkbox rather than manually entering the information. This enhancement eliminates typographical errors and the misinterpretation of information requested, which often results in the submission of incorrect information.

With these changes, the estimated burden time for completion of the DS-2032 is reduced from two hours to one hour.

List of Subjects in 22 CFR Parts 120, 122, 123, and 129

Arms and munitions, Registration, Exports, Brokering.

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the preamble, Title 22, Chapter I, Subchapter M, parts 120, 122, 123, and 129 are amended as follows:

PART 120—PURPOSE AND DEFINITIONS1. The authority citation for part 120 continues to read as follows:Authority:

2. In § 120.28, paragraph (a)(2) is revised to read as follows:§ 120.28Listing of forms referred to in this subchapter.

(a) * * *

(2) Statement of Registration (Form DS-2032).

§§ 120.33-120.36[Reserved]3. Part 120 is amended by reserving §§ 120.33 through 120.36 and adding § 120.37 to read as follows:§ 120.37Foreign ownership and foreign control.

Foreign ownership means more than 50 percent of the outstanding voting securities of the firm are owned by one or more foreign persons (as defined in § 120.16). Foreign control means one or more foreign persons have the authority or ability to establish or direct the general policies or day-to-day operations of the firm. Foreign control is presumed to exist where foreign persons own 25 percent or more of the outstanding voting securities unless one U.S. person controls an equal or larger percentage.

PART 122—REGISTRATION OF MANUFACTURERS AND EXPORTERS4. The authority citation for part 122 continues to read as follows:Authority:

5. Section 122.2 is revised to read as follows:§ 122.2Submission of registration statement.

(a)General.An intended registrant must submit a Department of State Form DS-2032 (Statement of Registration) to the Office of Defense Trade Controls Compliance by registered or overnight mail delivery, and must submit an electronic payment via Automated Clearing House payable to the Department of State of one of the fees prescribed in § 122.3(a) of this subchapter. Automated Clearing House (ACH) is an electronic network used to process financial transactions in the United States. Intended registrants should access the Directorate of Defense Trade Control's Web site athttp://www.pmddtc.state.govfor detailed guidelines on submitting an ACH electronic payment. Electronic payments must be in U.S. currency and must be payable through a U.S. financial institution. Cash, checks, foreign currency, or money orders will not be accepted. In addition, the Statement of Registration must be signed by a senior officer (e.g.,Chief Executive Officer, President, Secretary, Partner, Member, Treasurer, General Counsel) who has been empowered by the intended registrant to sign such documents. The intended registrant also shall submit documentation that demonstrates that it is incorporated or otherwise authorized to do business in the United States. The Directorate of Defense Trade Controls will notify the registrant if the Statement of Registration is incomplete either by notifying the registrant of what information is required or through the return of the entire registration package. Registrants may not establish new entities for the purpose of reducing registration fees.

(b)Statement of Registration Certification.The Statement of Registration of the intended registrant shall include a certification by an authorized senior officer of the following:

(1) Whether the intended registrant, chief executive officer, president, vice presidents, other senior officers or officials (e.g.,Comptroller, Treasurer, General Counsel) or any member of the board of directors:

(i) Has ever been indicted for or convicted of violating any of the U.S. criminal statutes enumerated in § 120.27 of this subchapter; or

(ii) Is ineligible to contract with, or to receive a license or other approval to import defense articles or defense services from, or to receive an export license or other approval from, any agency of the U.S. Government.

(2) Whether the intended registrant is foreign owned or foreign controlled (see § 120.37 of this subchapter). If the intended registrant is foreign owned or foreign controlled, the certification shall also include whether the intended registrant is incorporated or otherwise authorized to engage in business in the United States.

8. Section 123.16 is amended by revising paragraph (b)(9) introductory text to read as follows:§ 123.16Exemptions of general applicability.

(b) * * *

(9) Port Directors of U.S. Customs and Border Protection shall permit the temporary export without a license by a U.S. person of any unclassified component, part, tool or test equipment to a subsidiary, affiliate or facility owned or controlled by the U.S. person (see § 120.37 of this subchapter for definition of foreign ownership andforeign control) if the component, part, tool or test equipment is to be used for manufacture, assembly, testing, production, or modification provided:

PART 129—REGISTRATION AND LICENSING OF BROKERS9. The authority citation for part 129 continues to read as follows:Authority:

Sec. 38, Pub. L. 104-164, 110 Stat. 1437, (22 U.S.C. 2778).

10. Section 129.4 is amended by revising paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as follows:§ 129.4Registration statement and fees.

(a)General.An intended registrant must submit a Department of State Form DS-2032 (Statement of Registration) to the Office of Defense Trade Controls Compliance by registered or overnight mail delivery, and must submit an electronic payment via Automated Clearing House (ACH) or Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications (SWIFT), payable to the Department of State of the fees prescribed in § 122.3(a) of this subchapter. Automated Clearing House is an electronic network used to process financial transactions originating from within the United States and SWIFT is the messaging service used by financial institutions worldwide to issue international transfers for foreign accounts. Payment methods (i.e., ACH and SWIFT) are dependent on the source of the funds (U.S. or foreign bank) drawn from the applicant's account. The originating account must be the registrant's account and not a third party's account. Intended registrants should access the Directorate of Defense Trade Control's Web site athttp://www.pmddtc.state.govfor detailed guidelines on submitting ACH and SWIFT electronic payments. Payments, including from foreign brokers, must be in U.S. currency, payable through a U.S. financial institution. Cash, checks, foreign currency, or money orders will not be accepted. The Statement of Registration must be signed by a senior officer (e.g.,Chief Executive Officer, President, Secretary, Partner, Member, Treasurer, General Counsel) who has been empowered by the intended registrant to sign such documents. The intended registrant, whether a U.S. or foreign person, shall submit documentation that demonstrates it is incorporated or otherwise authorized to do business in its respective country. Foreign persons who are required to register shall provide information that is substantially similar in content to that which a U.S. person would provide under this provision (e.g.,foreign business license or similar authorization to do business). The Directorate of Defense Trade Controls will notify the registrant if the Statement of Registration is incomplete either by notifying the registrant of what information is required or through the return of the entire registration package. Registrants may not establish new entities for the purpose of reducing registration fees.

(b) A person registering as a broker who is already registered as a manufacturer or exporter in accordance with part 122 of this subchapter must cite their existing manufacturer or exporter registration, and must pay an additional fee according to the schedule prescribed in § 122.3(a) of this subchapter for registration as a broker.

The Office of the Secretary of the Department of the Interior and Bureau of Indian Affairs (collectively, the Department) are confirming the interim final rule published and effective on February 10, 2011, to implement the latest statutory changes to the Indian Land Consolidation Act, as amended by the 2004 American Indian Probate Reform Act and later amendments (ILCA/AIPRA). The February 10, 2011, publication stated that the Department would review comments on the interim final rule and either confirm the rule or initiate a proposed rulemaking. The Department did not receive any adverse comments, and therefore confirms the rule without change.

DATES:

The February 10, 2011, effective date of the interim final rule is confirmed.

On February 10, 2011, the Department published an interim final rule (76 FR 7500), under Docket No. BIA-2009-001, to implement the latest statutory changes to ILCA/AIPRA. The rule's changes primarily affect the probate of permanent improvements owned by a decedent that are attached to trust or restricted property owned by the decedent. These changes also affect the purchase of small fractional interests at probate by restricting who may purchase without consent and what interests may be purchased without consent.

The Department stated in the interim final rule that it would address comments received and, by a future publication in the Federal Register, confirm the interim final rule, with or without change, or initiate a proposed rulemaking.

The Department received one comment that expressly indicated it was not a substantive criticism of the rule, but requested a definition for the term “probate.” The regulations being amended by the interim final rule, 25 CFR part 15 and 43 CFR part 30, already contain a definition of “probate.” See 25 CFR 15.2, 43 CFR 4.201, 30.101. Consequently, the Department did not make any change to the interim final rule as a result of this comment. The comment also included a suggestion regarding estate planning that is outside the scope of the interim final rule.

For these reasons, the Department is confirming the interim final rule without change.

EPA is making an interim final determination to defer imposition of sanctions based on a proposed determination, published elsewhere in thisFederal Register, that the State of California has submitted a rule that satisfies the requirements of Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 185 fee program.

DATES:

This interim final determination is effective on July 28, 2011. However, comments will be accepted until August 29, 2011.

ADDRESSES:

Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0571, by one of the following methods:

Instructions:All comments will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online athttp://www.regulations.gov,including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as such and should not be submitted throughhttp://www.regulations.govor e-mail.http://www.regulations.govis an “anonymous access” system, and EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.

Docket:Generally, documents in the docket for this action are available electronically athttp://www.regulations.govand in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the docket are listed athttp://www.regulations.gov,some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in theFOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACTsection.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lily Wong, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-4114,wong.lily@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document, “we,” “us” and “our” refer to EPA.

I. Background

On January 13, 2010 (75 FR 1716), EPA published a final limited approval and limited disapproval of revisions to the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). EPA's final action concerned SJVUAPCD Rule 3170, “Federally Mandated Ozone Nonattainment Fee,” a fee rule which applied to major sources of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (NOX) emissions. SJVUAPCD submitted Rule 3170 pursuant to section 185 of the CAA. EPA determined that while Rule 3170 strengthened the SIP, it did not fully meet the requirements of section 185 of the CAA. EPA's final action started a sanctions clock for imposition of offset sanctions 18 months after February 12, 2010 and highway sanctions 6 months after offset sanctions, pursuant to section 179 of the CAA and our regulations at 40 CFR 52.31.

On May 19, 2011, SJVUAPCD amended Rule 3170 and on June 14, 2011, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) submitted amended Rule 3170. In the Proposed Rules section of today'sFederal Register, we have proposed approval of this submittal. Based on today's proposed approval, we are taking this final rulemaking action, effective on publication, to defer imposition of sanctions that were triggered by our January 13, 2010 limited approval and limited disapproval of Rule 3170, based on a finding that it is more likely than not that the SJVUAPCD has submitted a rule that meets the requirements of sections 172(e) and 185 of the CAA.

EPA is providing the public with an opportunity to comment on this deferral of sanctions. If comments are submitted that change our assessment described in this final determination and the proposed approval of Rule 3170, we would take final action proposing to partially or fully disapprove Rule 3170 and lifting this deferral of the sanctions. If no comments are submitted that change our assessment, then with regard to the failure to meet the requirements of section 185 of the CAA, any imposed sanctions would no longer apply and any sanction clocks would be permanently terminated on the effective date of a final approval of Rule 3170.

II. EPA Action

We are making an interim final determination to defer CAA section 179 sanctions associated with SJVUAPCD's 1-hour Ozone CAA section 185 obligation based on our concurrent proposal to fully approve Rule 3170 as meeting sections 172(e) and 185 of the CAA.

Because EPA has preliminarily determined that Rule 3170 meets the requirements of sections 172(e) and 185 of the CAA and is fully approvable, relief from sanctions should be provided as quickly as possible. Therefore, EPA is invoking the good cause exception under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in not providing an opportunity for comment before this action takes effect (5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)). However, by this action EPA is providing the public with a chance to comment on EPA's determination after the effective date, and EPA will consider any comments received in determining whether to reverse such action.

EPA believes that notice-and-comment rulemaking before the effective date of this action is impracticable and contrary to the public interest. EPA has reviewed the State's submittal and, through its proposed action, is indicating that it is more likely than not that the State has submitted a revision to the SIP that meets sections 172(e) and 185 of the CAA that was the basis for the action that started the sanctions clocks. Therefore, it is not in the public interest to impose sanctions. EPA believes that it is necessary to use the interim final rulemaking process to defer sanctions while EPA completes its rulemaking process on the approvability of the State's submittal. Moreover, withrespect to the effective date of this action, EPA is invoking the good cause exception to the 30-day notice requirement of the APA because the purpose of this notice is to relieve a restriction (5 U.S.C. § 553(d)(1)).

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

This action defers Federal sanctions and imposes no additional requirements.

Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this action is not a “significant regulatory action” and therefore is not subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget.

This action is not subject to Executive Order 13211, “Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use” (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001) because it is not a significant regulatory action.

The administrator certifies that this action will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601et seq.).

This rule does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-4).

This rule does not have tribal implications because it will not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).

This action does not have Federalism implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999).

This rule is not subject to Executive Order 13045, “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks” (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically significant.

The requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272) do not apply to this rule because it imposes no standards.

This rule does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501et seq.).

The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801et seq.,as added by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating the rule must submit a rule report to Congress and the Comptroller General. However, section 808 provides that any rule for which the issuing agency for good cause finds that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest, shall take effect at such time as the agency promulgating the rule determines. 5 U.S.C. 808(2). EPA has made such a good cause finding, including the reasons therefore, and established an effective date of July 28, 2011. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior to publication of the rule in theFederal Register. A major rule cannot take effect until 60 days after it is published in theFederal Register. This rule is not a “major rule” as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA, petitions for judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by September 26, 2011. Filing a petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule does not affect the finality of this rule for the purpose of judicial review nor does it extend the time within which petition for judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings to enforce its requirements (see section 307(b)(2)).

This rule identifies communities, where the sale of flood insurance has been authorized under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), that are scheduled for suspension on the effective dates listed within this rule because of noncompliance with the floodplain management requirements of the program. If the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) receives documentation that the community has adopted the required floodplain management measures prior to the effective suspension date given in this rule, the suspension will not occur and a notice of this will be provided by publication in theFederal Registeron a subsequent date.

DATES:

Effective Dates:The effective date of each community's scheduled suspension is the third date (“Susp.”) listed in the third column of the following tables.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

If you want to determine whether a particular community was suspended on the suspension date or for further information, contact David Stearrett, Mitigation Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2953.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The NFIP enables property owners to purchase flood insurance which is generally not otherwise available. In return, communities agree to adopt and administer local floodplain management aimed at protecting lives and new construction from future flooding. Section 1315 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4022, prohibits flood insurance coverage as authorized under the NFIP, 42 U.S.C. 4001et seq.;unless an appropriate public body adopts adequate floodplain management measures with effective enforcement measures. The communities listed in this document no longer meet that statutory requirement for compliancewith program regulations, 44 CFR part 59. Accordingly, the communities will be suspended on the effective date in the third column. As of that date, flood insurance will no longer be available in the community. However, some of these communities may adopt and submit the required documentation of legally enforceable floodplain management measures after this rule is published but prior to the actual suspension date. These communities will not be suspended and will continue their eligibility for the sale of insurance. A notice withdrawing the suspension of the communities will be published in theFederal Register.

In addition, FEMA has identified the Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHAs) in these communities by publishing a Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). The date of the FIRM, if one has been published, is indicated in the fourth column of the table. No direct Federal financial assistance (except assistance pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act not in connection with a flood) may legally be provided for construction or acquisition of buildings in identified SFHAs for communities not participating in the NFIP and identified for more than a year, on FEMA's initial flood insurance map of the community as having flood-prone areas (section 202(a) of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C. 4106(a), as amended). This prohibition against certain types of Federal assistance becomes effective for the communities listed on the date shown in the last column. The Administrator finds that notice and public comment under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are impracticable and unnecessary because communities listed in this final rule have been adequately notified.

Each community receives 6-month, 90-day, and 30-day notification letters addressed to the Chief Executive Officer stating that the community will be suspended unless the required floodplain management measures are met prior to the effective suspension date. Since these notifications were made, this final rule may take effect within less than 30 days.

National Environmental Policy Act. This rule is categorically excluded from the requirements of 44 CFR part 10, Environmental Considerations. No environmental impact assessment has been prepared.

Regulatory Flexibility Act. The Administrator has determined that this rule is exempt from the requirements of the Regulatory Flexibility Act because the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4022, prohibits flood insurance coverage unless an appropriate public body adopts adequate floodplain management measures with effective enforcement measures. The communities listed no longer comply with the statutory requirements, and after the effective date, flood insurance will no longer be available in the communities unless remedial action takes place.

Regulatory Classification. This final rule is not a significant regulatory action under the criteria of section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 of September 30, 1993, Regulatory Planning and Review, 58 FR 51735.

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. This rule involves no policies that have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132.

§ 64.6[Amended]2. The tables published under the authority of § 64.6 are amended as follows:State and locationCommunity No.Effective date authorization/cancellation of sale of flood insurance in communityCurrent

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is issuing proposed regulations to clarify that an employee's same-sex domestic partner qualifies, and should be treated as, a family member for purposes of eligibility for noncompetitive appointment based on overseas employment, as provided in section 315.608 of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations. These regulations implement, in part, a June 2, 2010, Presidential Memorandum by providing same-sex domestic partners with the same employment opportunities that opposite-sex spouses of Federal employees receive under 5 CFR 315.608.

DATES:

Comments must be received on or before September 26, 2011.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments, which are identified by RIN 3206-AM35, by any of the following methods:

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is issuing proposed regulations to amend its current regulations on career and career conditional employment at title 5, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), part 315. These changes would ensure that an employee's same-sex domestic partner qualifies, and should be treated as, a family member for purposes of eligibility for noncompetitive appointment based on overseas employment, as provided in section 315.608 of title 5, CFR.

Background

On June 17, 2009, President Obama issued a memorandum regarding Federal benefits and non-discrimination that requested the Secretary of State and the Director of OPM, in consultation with the Department of Justice, to extend previously identified statutorily based benefits that those agencies believed could be extended to qualified same-sex domestic partners of Federal employees consistent with underlying law. This memorandum also directed the heads of executive departments and agencies, in consultation with OPM, to conduct a review of the benefits offered by their respective departments and agencies to determine whether they had the authority to extend such benefits to the same-sex domestic partners of Federal employees. The memorandum further requested that OPM, in consultation with the Department of Justice, make recommendations regarding any additional measures that could be taken to provide benefits to the same-sex domestic partners of Federal Government employees, consistent with existing law.

On June 2, 2010, the President issued another memorandum, entitled “Extension of Benefits to Same-Sex Domestic Partners of Federal Employees,” that published the results of the review and identified the benefits that could be extended to same-sex domestic partners and their families. This proposed regulation responds to Section 1(a)(iii) of the President's memorandum, which identified additional benefits OPM had concluded it could offer and requested OPM to “issue a proposed rule that would clarify that employees' same-sex domestic partners qualify as `family members' for purposes of noncompetitive appointments made pursuant to Executive Order 12721 of July 30, 1990.”

Also on June 2, 2010, OPM issued a Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies, entitled “Implementation of the President's Memorandum Regarding Extension of Benefits to Same-Sex Domestic Partners of Federal Employees” to help fulfill the Administration's policy. The memorandum provides definitions to help ensure its consistent application across the Federal Government.

Section 315.608 of title 5, CFR, authorizes noncompetitive appointments to competitive service positions in the United States for certain family members of Federal employees and military personnel who have served overseas. To be eligible for noncompetitive appointment under this authority, a “family member” must have completed 52 weeks of creditable service under a local hire appointment overseas during the time he or she accompanied a Federal civilian employee or member of a uniformed service officially assigned to an overseas location. Family members must also meet all applicable provisions of 5 CFR 315.608 in order to be eligible for noncompetitive appointment. The definition of “family member” in 5 CFR 315.608(e)(1) is currently limited to an “unmarried child under the age of 23 or a spouse.” To implement section 1(a)(iii) of the President's June 2, 2010, memorandum, OPM is proposing to change the definition of “family member” and to add new definitions for “domestic partner” and “domestic partnership” at 5 CFR 315.608(e).

These definitions are based upon the definitions contained in the Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies, entitled “Implementation of the President's Memorandum Regarding Extension of Benefits to Same-Sex Domestic Partners of Federal Employees,” which OPM issued on June 2, 2010.

Paragraph (iv) of thedomestic partnershipdefinition requires that the partners “share responsibility for a significant measure of each other's financial obligations.” This criterion, which appears in this and in prior regulations promulgated pursuant to the President's June 2, 2010, memorandum, is intended to require only that there be financial interdependence between the partners; it should not be interpreted toexclude partnerships in which one partner stays at home while the other is the primary breadwinner.

We have made a slight change to the wording of criterion (vii). That criterion is intended to prohibit recognition of domestic partnerships between individuals who are related in a manner that would preclude them from marrying were they of opposite sexes. We are maintaining this criterion, but clarifying that the determination is to be made at the time the domestic partnership is formed. It should not be re-examined if the couple relocates to a different jurisdiction. This approach is consistent with treatment of opposite-sex marriages.

For the reasons outlined in the President's June 17, 2009, and June 2, 2010, memoranda, these regulations extend domestic partnership benefits only to same-sex couples who are currently unable to obtain spousal benefits by entering a Federally recognized marriage.

Documentation or proof of a family member relationship for purposes of noncompetitive appointment eligibility would be based on each agency's internal policies. Agencies have authority to request additional information in cases of suspected abuse or fraud, and they would continue to be able to exercise that authority under these proposed regulations. Agencies would be expected to apply the same standards for verification for all dependent and family member relationships, including domestic partners.

E.O. 12866 and E.O. 13563 Regulatory Review

This rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget in accordance with Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

I certify that this regulation will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because it affects only Federal agencies and employees.

(1)Family member.An unmarried child under age 23, a spouse, or a domestic partner. An individual must have been a family member at the time he or she met the overseas service requirement and other conditions but does not need to be a family member at the time of noncompetitive appointment in the United States.

(6)Domestic partner.A person in a domestic partnership with an employee or annuitant of the same sex

(7)Domestic partnership.A committed relationship between two adults, of the same sex, in which the partners:

(i) Are each other's sole domestic partner and intend to remain so indefinitely;

(ii) Maintain a common residence, and intend to continue to do so (or would maintain a common residence but for an assignment abroad or other employment-related, financial, or similar obstacle);

(iii) Are at least 18 years of age and mentally competent to consent to contract;

(iv) Share responsibility for a significant measure of each other's financial obligations;

(v) Are not married or joined in a civil union to anyone else;

(vi) Are not the domestic partner of anyone else;

(vii) Are not related in a way that, if they were of opposite sex, would prohibit legal marriage in the U.S. jurisdiction in which the domestic partnership was formed;

(viii) Are willing to certify, if required by the agency, that they understand that willful falsification of any documentation required to establish that an individual is in a domestic partnership may lead to disciplinary action and the recovery of the cost of benefits received related to such falsification, as well as constitute a criminal violation under 18 U.S.C. 1001, and that the method for securing such certification, if required, shall be determined by the agency; and

(ix) Are willing promptly to disclose, if required by the agency, any dissolution or material change in the status of the domestic partnership.

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management is proposing to revise its regulations on evacuation pay and the separate maintenance allowance for duty at Johnston Island to ensure that same-sex domestic partners of Federal employees and the children of such domestic partners have access to these benefits to the same extent as spouses of Federal employees and their children. These changes would fulfill the Administration policy expressed in Sections 1(a)(v) and (a)(vii) of the President's June 2, 2010, memorandum on the “Extension of Benefits to Same-Sex Domestic Partners of Federal Employees.”

DATES:

Comments must be received on or before September 26, 2011.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments, identified by RIN number “3206-AM31” using either of the following methods:

Federal eRulemaking Portal:http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments. All submissions received through the Portal must include the agency name and docket number or Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) for this rulemaking.

Kurt Springmann, by telephone at (202) 606-2858 or by e-mail atpay-leave-policy@opm.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is issuing proposed regulations to amend its current regulations on evacuation pay at title 5 CFR, part 550, subpart D, and separate maintenance allowance for duty at Johnston Island, at title 5 CFR, part 591, subpart D. These changes would ensure that same-sex domestic partners of Federal employees and the children of such domestic partners have the same access to these benefits that spouses of Federal employees and their children have.

Background

On June 17, 2009, President Obama issued a memorandum regarding Federal benefits and non-discrimination that requested the Secretary of State and the Director of OPM, in consultation with the Department of Justice, to extend previously identified statutorily based benefits that those agencies believed could be extended to qualified same-sex domestic partners of Federal employees consistent with underlying law. This memorandum also directed the heads of executive departments and agencies, in consultation with OPM, to conduct a review of the benefits offered by their respective departments and agencies to determine whether they had the authority to extend such benefits to the same-sex domestic partners of Federal employees. The memorandum further requested that OPM, in consultation with the Department of Justice, make recommendations regarding any additional measures that could be taken to provide benefits to the same-sex domestic partners of Federal Government employees, consistent with existing law.

On June 2, 2010, the President issued another memorandum, entitled “Extension of Benefits to Same-Sex Domestic Partners of Federal Employees,” that published the results of the review and identified the benefits that could be extended to same-sex domestic partners and their families. This proposed regulation responds to two portions of the President's memorandum, which identified additional benefits OPM had concluded it could offer and requested OPM to (1) “clarify that under appropriate circumstances, employees' same-sex domestic partners and their children qualify as dependents for purposes of evacuation payments made under 5 U.S.C. 5522-5523”; and (2) “clarify that employees' same-sex domestic partners qualify as dependents for purposes of calculating the extra allowance payable under 5 U.S.C. 5942a to assist employees stationed on Johnston Island, subject to any limitations applicable to spouses.”

Also on June 2, 2010, OPM issued a Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies, entitled “Implementation of the President's Memorandum Regarding Extension of Benefits to Same-Sex Domestic Partners of Federal Employees” to help fulfill the Administration's policy. The memorandum provides definitions to help ensure its consistent application across the Federal Government.

Changes to Evacuation Pay Regulations

The law and regulations governing evacuation pay (5 U.S.C. 5522-5523 and subpart D of 5 CFR, part 550) provide for payments to offset certain expenses incurred because of the evacuation of an employee's dependents. In response to the Administration's policy to extend benefits to domestic partners of employees, and their children, where consistent with law, OPM has undertaken to clarify the evacuation pay regulations. OPM is altering its definition ofdependent, and is adding new definitions fordomestic partner,domestic partnership, andfamily member.

In the current regulations at § 550.402,dependentis defined as “a relative of the employee residing with the employee and dependent on the employee for support.” OPM proposes to change the definition ofdependentto read “a family member of the employee residing with the employee and dependent on the employee for support.” In order to ensure consistent implementation of the Administration's policy and to clarify the definition ofdependent, OPM is also adding definitions fordomestic partner,domestic partnership, andfamily member.

These definitions are based upon those contained in the Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies, entitled “Implementation of the President's Memorandum Regarding Extension of Benefits to Same-Sex Domestic Partners of Federal Employees,” which OPM issued on June 2, 2010.

Paragraph (4) of thedomestic partnershipdefinition requires that that the partners “share responsibility for a significant measure of each other's financial obligations.” This criterion, which appears in this and in prior regulations promulgated pursuant to the President's June 2, 2010, memorandum, [requires only that there be financial interdependence between the partners; it should not be interpreted to exclude partnerships in which one partner stays at home while the other is the primary breadwinner].

We have made a slight change to the wording of criterion (7). That criterion is intended to prohibit recognition of domestic partnerships between individuals who are related in a manner that would preclude them from marrying were they of opposite sexes. We are maintaining this criterion, but clarifying that the determination is to be made at the time the domestic partnership is formed. It should not be re-examined if the couple relocates to a different jurisdiction. This approach is consistent with treatment of opposite-sex marriages.

For the reasons outlined in the President's June 17, 2009, and June 2, 2010, memoranda, these regulations extend domestic partnership benefits only to same-sex couples, who are currently unable to obtain spousal benefits by entering a Federally recognized marriage.

The definition offamily memberis derived from a regulation recently published in response to the President's original memorandum that amended OPM's regulations on sick leave, voluntary leave transfer, voluntary leave bank, and emergency leave transfer. This final regulation was published on June 14, 2010 (75 FR 33491), in response to Section 1 of the President's original memorandum.

We believe the modification of the definition ofdependentand the addition of definitions fordomestic partner, domestic partnership,andfamily member,read together, provide a full picture of who qualifies for benefits authorized in 5 CFR part 550, subpart D.

Documentation or proof of a dependent or family member relationship for purposes of eligibility for evacuation payments would be based on each agency's internal policies. Agencies have authority to request additional information in cases of suspected abuse or fraud, and they would continue to be able to exercise that authority under these proposed regulations. Agencies would be expected to apply the same standards for verification of requests for payments for all dependent and family member relationships, including domestic partners.

Changes to Separate Maintenance Allowance for Duty at Johnston Island

In response to the directive to clarify the separate maintenance allowance for duty at Johnston Island for purposes of calculating the extra allowance payable under 5 U.S.C. 5942a, OPM is altering its current definition offamily member,and is adding new definitions fordomestic partneranddomestic partnership.

The current regulations found at § 591.402 define afamily memberas “one or more of the following relatives of an employee who would normally reside with the employee except for circumstances warranting the granting of a separate maintenance allowance, but who does not receive from the Government an allowance similar to that granted to the employee and who is not deemed to be a family member of another employee for the purpose of determining the amount of a separate maintenance allowance or similar allowance:

We believe the modification of the definition offamily memberand the addition of definitions fordomestic partneranddomestic partnership,clarify coverage for purposes of separate maintenance allowance. The definitions fordomestic partneranddomestic partnershipare the same as those proposed for the evacuation pay regulations in this publication.

Documentation or proof of a family member relationship for purposes of eligibility for a separate maintenance allowance at Johnston Island will be based on each agency's internal policies. Agencies have authority to request additional information in cases of suspected abuse or fraud, and they would continue to be able to exercise that authority under these proposed regulations. Agencies would be expected to apply the same standards for verification of requests for payments for all family members relationships, including domestic partners.

Amount of Payment

OPM is also adding a reference to domestic partner in § 591.403(a). The current regulations read: “The annual rate of the separate maintenance allowance paid to an employee shall be determined by the number of individuals, including a spouse and/or one or more other family members, that are maintained at a location other than Johnston Island.” OPM proposes to change the regulations to say: “The annual rate of the separate maintenance allowance paid to an employee shall be determined by the number of individuals, including a spouse, a domestic partner, and/or one or more other family members, who are maintained at a location other than Johnston Island.” We believe this helps to clarify the coverage.

E.O. 12866, Regulatory Review

This rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget in accordance with Executive Order 12866.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

I certify that these regulations will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because they will apply only to Federal agencies and employees.

PART 550—PAY ADMINISTRATION (GENERAL)Subpart D—Payments and Flexibilities During an Evacuation

1. The authority citation for subpart D of part 550 continues to read as follows:

Authority:

5 U.S.C. 5527; E.O. 10982, 3 CFR 1959-1963, p.502.

2. In § 550.402, the definition of “dependent” is revised and the definitions of “domestic partner”, “domestic partnership”, and “family member” are added to read as follows:

§ 550.402Definitions.

Dependentmeans a family member of the employee residing with the employee and dependent on the employee for support.

Domestic partnermeans a person in a domestic partnership with an employee or annuitant of the same sex.

Domestic partnershipmeans a committed relationship between two adults of the same sex in which the partners—

(1) Are each other's sole domestic partner and intend to remain so indefinitely;

(2) Maintain a common residence, and intend to continue to do so (or would maintain a common residence but for an assignment abroad or other employment-related, financial, or similar obstacle);

(3) Are at least 18 years of age and mentally competent to consent to contract;

(4) Share responsibility for a significant measure of each other's financial obligations;

(5) Are not married or joined in a civil union to anyone else;

(6) Are not the domestic partner of anyone else;

(7) Are not related in a way that, if they were of opposite sex, would prohibit legal marriage in the U.S. jurisdiction in which the domestic partnership was formed;

(8) Are willing to certify, if required by the agency, that they understand that willful falsification of any documentation required to establish that an individual is in a domestic partnership may lead to disciplinary action and the recovery of the cost of benefits received related to such falsification, as well as constitute a criminal violation under 18 U.S.C. 1001, and that the method for securing such certification, if required, will be determined by the agency; and

(9) Are willing promptly to disclose, if required by the agency, any dissolution or material change in the status of the domestic partnership.

Family membermeans an individual with any of the following relationships to the employee:

(1) Spouse, and parents thereof;

(2) Sons and daughters, and spouses thereof;

(3) Parents, and spouses thereof;

(4) Brothers and sisters, and spouses thereof;

(5) Grandparents and grandchildren, and spouses thereof;

(6) Domestic partner, and children and parents thereof, including a domestic partner of any individual in paragraphs (2)-(5) of this definition; and

(7) Any individual related by blood or affinity whose close association with the employee is the equivalent of a family relationship.

PART 591—ALLOWANCES AND DIFFERENTIALSSubpart D—Separate Maintenance Allowance for Duty at Johnston Island

3. The authority citation for subpart D of part 591 continues to read as follows:

Authority:

5 U.S.C. 5942a(b); E.O. 12822, 3 CFR, 1992 Comp., p. 325.

4. In § 591.402, the definitions of “domestic partner” and “domestic partnership” are added, and the definition of “family member” is revised to read as follows:

§ 591.402Definitions.

Domestic partnermeans a person in a domestic partnership with an employee or annuitant of the same sex.

Domestic partnershipmeans a committed relationship between two adults of the same sex in which the partners—

(1) Are each other's sole domestic partner and intend to remain so indefinitely;

(2) Maintain a common residence, and intend to continue to do so (or would maintain a common residence but for an assignment abroad or other employment-related, financial, or similar obstacle);

(3) Are at least 18 years of age and mentally competent to consent to contract;

(4) Share responsibility for a significant measure of each other's financial obligations;

(5) Are not married or joined in a civil union to anyone else;

(6) Are not the domestic partner of anyone else;

(7) Are not related in a way that, if they were of opposite sex, would prohibit legal marriage in the U.S. jurisdiction in which the domestic partnership was formed;

(8) Are willing to certify, if required by the agency, that they understand that willful falsification of any documentation required to establish that an individual is in a domestic partnership may lead to disciplinary action and the recovery of the cost of benefits received related to such falsification, as well as constitute a criminal violation under 18 U.S.C. 1001, and that the method for securing such certification, if required, will be determined by the agency; and

(9) Are willing promptly to disclose, if required by the agency, any dissolution or material change in the status of the domestic partnership.

Family membermeans one or more of the following relatives of an employee who would normally reside with the employee except for circumstances warranting the granting of a separate maintenance allowance, but who does not receive from the Government an allowance similar to that granted to the employee and who is not deemed to be a family member of another employee for the purpose of determining the amount of a separate maintenance allowance or similar allowance:

(1) Children who are unmarried and under 21 years of age or who, regardless of age, are incapable of self-support, including natural children, step and adopted children, and those under legal guardianship or custody of the employee, or of the employee's spouse or domestic partner, when they are expected to be under such legal guardianship or custody at least until they reach 21 years of age and when dependent upon and normally residing with the guardian;

(2) Parents (including step and legally adoptive parents) of the employee, or of the employee's spouse or domestic partner, when such parents are at least 51 percent dependent on the employee for support;

(3) Sisters and brothers (including step or adoptive sisters and brothers) of the employee, or of the employee's spouse or domestic partner, when such sisters and brothers are at least 51 percent dependent on the employee for support, unmarried and under 21 years of age, or regardless of age, are incapable of self-support;

(4) Spouse, excluding a spouse independently entitled to and receiving a similar allowance; or

(5) Domestic partner, excluding a domestic partner independently entitled to and receiving a similar allowance.

4. In § 591.403, revise paragraph (a) to read as follows:

§ 591.403Amount of payment.

(a) The annual rate of the separate maintenance allowance paid to an employee shall be determined by the number of individuals, including a spouse, a domestic partner, and/or one or more other family members, who are maintained at a location other than Johnston Island.

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management is proposing to revise its regulations on agencies' use of appropriated funds to provide child care subsidies for lower-income civilian employees, to make the regulations clearer and more concise. It also would make certain technical corrections, and substantive changes including in the definition of “child” for purposes of the subpart. The proposed regulations also clarify the scope of regulations concerning alcohol and drug abuse counseling programs for employees and expand the regulations to extend coverage to domestic partners of Federal employees.

DATES:

Comments must be received on or before August 29, 2011.

ADDRESSES:

Send or deliver comments to Ingrid Burford, Work Life Program Specialist, U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 1900 E Street, NW., Rm. 7456, Washington, DC 20415-9700; or FAX to (202) 606-9939. Comments may also be sent through the Federal eRulemaking Portal athttp://www.regulations.gov.All submissions received through the Portal must include the agency name and docket number or the Regulation Identifier Number (RIN) for this rulemaking. Please specify the subpart and section number for each comment.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ingrid Burford, (202) 606-0416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is issuing a proposed rule revising part 792 of title 5, Code of Federal Regulations. The proposed rule would make changes in both subparts of that part, concerning employee assistance programs and child care subsidies for low-income employees, respectively, in accordance with the Obama Administration's policy, expressed in Presidential Memoranda dated June 17, 2009, and June 2, 2010, to extend benefits, where possible, to same-sex domestic partners. The changes to subpart A also would remove obsolete references to title 42 of the United States Code.

Background

On June 17, 2009, President Obama issued a Memorandum regarding Federal benefits and non-discrimination that requested the Secretary of State and the Director of OPM, in consultation with the Department of Justice, to extend previously identified statutorily based benefits that those agencies believed could be extended to qualified same-sex domestic partners of Federal employees consistent with underlying law. This Memorandum also directed the heads of executive departments and agencies, in consultation with OPM, to conduct a review of the benefits offered by their respective departments and agencies to determine whether they had the authority to extend such benefits to the same-sex domestic partners of Federal employees. The Memorandumfurther requested that OPM, in consultation with the Department of Justice, make recommendations regarding any additional measures that could be taken to provide benefits to the same-sex domestic partners of Federal Government employees, consistent with existing law.

On June 2, 2010, the President issued another Memorandum, entitled “Extension of Benefits to Same-Sex Domestic Partners of Federal Employees,” that published the results of the review and identified the benefits that could be extended to same-sex domestic partners and their families. These proposed regulations respond to Sections 1(a)(i) and (ii) of the President's Memorandum, which identified additional benefits OPM had concluded it could offer and requested OPM to “(i) clarify that the children of employees' same-sex domestic partners fall within the definition of “child” for purposes of Federal child-care subsidies, and, where appropriate, for child-care services” and “(ii) clarify that, for purposes of employee assistance programs, same-sex domestic partners and their children qualify as “family members.”

Also on June 2, 2010, OPM issued a Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies, entitled “Implementation of the President's Memorandum Regarding Extension of Benefits to Same-Sex Domestic Partners of Federal Employees” to help fulfill the Administration's policy. The Memorandum provides definitions to help ensure its consistent application across the Federal Government.

Changes to Regulations Concerning Drug and Alcohol Abuse Programs

We are including a new provision in section 792.101 of title 5, Code of Federal regulations, to clarify that an employee's domestic partner, and any children of the employee's domestic partner, are included within the employee's “family” for purposes of access to alcohol and drug abuse programs. These programs, for the most part, are already accessible by individuals whose personal relationship to the employee (including but not limited to the employee's domestic partner) is close enough to potentially affect the employee's performance on the job. Therefore, the addition of specific references to domestic partners and their children is a clarifying change to promote consistent implementation of this regulation across the Government.

For purposes of this regulation, we have chosen not to define “domestic partner” or “domestic partnership.” Agencies are already providing access to these programs to individuals who are close enough to the employee to potentially affect the employee's performance on the job. Our intent is to clarify that same-sex domestic partners meet this standard, but not to limit agency discretion to decide that other relationships, including opposite-sex domestic partnerships, also meet this standard.

Changes to Child Care Subsidies Regulations

The proposed changes to subpart B would clarify and consolidate regulations governing Federal agencies' use of appropriated funds to provide child care subsidies for lower-income civilian employees. The revision would correct the way the age limitation for covered children is expressed and update obsolete references and citations. The regulations currently provide that the subsidies may apply to child care for children from birththroughage 13 and for disabled childrenthroughage 18. We are amending this provision to state that the regulations apply to childrenunderage 13 and disabled childrenunderage 18. This change will help ensure that agency child care subsidy programs under part 792 conform to qualification rules used by the Internal Revenue Service for determining the tax treatment of dependent care assistance plans.

The proposed rule would make additional clarifying changes, including elimination of the question-and-answer format that currently appears in subpart B. We are adopting a narrative format to consolidate and remove repetitive content and content that is not regulatory in nature. The changes also include certain corrections to definitions, such as removing the “living with” requirement from the definition of “biological child” and changing the defined term from “child care contractor” to “child care provider”, which is the term actually used in the regulation.

We are also adding definitions of “domestic partner” and “domestic partnership” to subpart B. These definitions are based upon the OPM Memorandum described earlier in this Supplementary Information and have been used in other OPM regulations.

Paragraph (4) of thedomestic partnershipdefinition requires that the partners “share responsibility for a significant measure of each other's financial obligations.” This criterion, which appears in this and in prior regulations promulgated pursuant to the President's June 2, 2010, memorandum, is intended to require only that there be financial interdependence between the partners; it should not be interpreted to exclude partnerships in which one partner stays at home while the other is the primary breadwinner.

We have made a slight change to the wording of criterion (7). That criterion is intended to prohibit recognition of domestic partnerships between individuals who are related in a manner that would preclude them from marrying were they of opposite sexes. We are maintaining this criterion, but clarifying that the determination is to be made at the time the domestic partnership is formed. It should not be re-examined if the couple relocates to a different jurisdiction. This approach is consistent with treatment of opposite-sex marriages.

Unlike the change to the regulations involving drug and alcohol abuse programs discussed above, these regulations extend “domestic partnership” benefits only to same-sex couples who are currently unable to obtain spousal benefits by entering into a Federally recognized marriage. That is because child care subsidies are currently available only for expenses associated with the employee's children or children of the employee's spouse. Accordingly, it is appropriate to include the children of same-sex domestic partners in order to reflect the President's direction to extend benefits to the same-sex domestic partners of Federal employees to the same extent such benefits are available to opposite-sex spouses, consistent with law.

The reference in paragraph (8) of thedomestic partnershipdefinition to documentation or proof of a dependent or family member relationship for purposes of eligibility for evacuation payments would be based on each agency's internal policies. Agencies have authority to request additional information in cases of suspected abuse or fraud, and they would continue to be able to exercise that authority under these proposed regulations. Agencies would be expected to apply the same standards for verification of requests for payments for all dependent and family member relationships, including domestic partners.

We are also proposing to change OPM's annual requirement to produce a report on agencies' use of the authority to pay child care subsidies, to a biannual requirement. OPM will continue, however, to collect annual data from Federal agencies on their child care subsidy programs.

Finally, these proposed regulations would update the authority citation for part 792 and would change the title ofthe part from “Federal Employees' Health and Counseling Programs” to “Federal Employees' Health, Counseling, and Work/Life Programs” so that it is broad enough to encompass the child care subsidy program.

E.O. 12866, Regulatory Review

This rule has been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget in accordance with Executive Order 12866 and 13563.

Regulatory Flexibility Act

I certify that these regulations would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities because they would affect only Federal agencies and employees.

Sections 7361 and 7362 of title 5, United States Code, provide that the Office of Personnel Management is responsible for developing and maintaining, in cooperation with the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services and with other agencies, appropriate prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation programs and services for Federal civilian employees with alcohol and drug abuse problems. To the extent feasible, agencies are encouraged to extend services to families (including domestic partners and their children) of alcohol and/or drug abusing employees and to employees who have family members (including domestic partners and their children) who have alcohol and/or drug problems. Such programs and services shall make optimal use of existing Government facilities, services, and skills.

5. Section 792.102 is revised to read as follows:

§ 792.102General.

It is the policy of the Federal Government to offer appropriate prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation programs and services for Federal civilian employees with alcohol and drug problems. Short-term counseling or referral, or offers thereof, shall constitute the appropriate prevention, treatment, and rehabilitation programs and services for alcohol abuse, alcoholism, and drug abuse required under subchapter VI of chapter 73 of title 5, United States Code. Federal agencies must establish programs to assist employees with these problems in accordance with that subchapter.

6. Section 792.105 is amended by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:

§ 792.105Agency responsibilities.

(b) Agencies must issue internal instructions implementing the requirements of 5 U.S.C. 7361-7363 and this subpart.

The purpose of this subpart is to implement section 590(g) of title 40, United States Code, which permits an Executive agency to use appropriated funds to improve the affordability of child care for lower-income employees. The law applies to child care in the United States and in overseas locations. Employees can benefit from reduced child care rates at Federal child care centers, non-Federal child care centers, and in family child care homes.

§ 792.202Definitions.

In this subpart—

Childmeans a child who bears any of the following relationships to either an employee, the employee's spouse, or the employee's domestic partner:

(1) A biological child;

(2) An adopted child;

(3) A stepchild;

(4) A foster child;

(5) A child for whom a judicial determination of support has been obtained; or

(6) A child to whose support the employee, the employee's spouse, or the employee's domestic partner makes regular and substantial contributions.

Child care providermeans an individual or entity providing child care services for which Federal employees' families are eligible. The provider must be licensed or regulated, and the provider's services can be provided in a Federally-sponsored child care center, a non-Federal center, or a family child care home.

Child care subsidy programmeans the program established by an agency in using appropriated funds, as provided in this subpart, to assist lower-income employees with child care costs. The program can include such activities as determining which employees receive a subsidy and the size of their subsidies; distributing agency funds to participating providers; and tracking and reporting information to OPM such as total cost and employee use of the program.

Disabled childmeans a child who is unable to care for himself or herself because of a physical or mental condition as determined by a physician or licensed or certified psychologist.

Domestic partnermeans a person in a domestic partnership with an employee or annuitant of the same sex.

Domestic partnershipmeans a committed relationship between two adults of the same sex in which the partners—

(1) Are each other's sole domestic partner and intend to remain so indefinitely;

(2) Maintain a common residence, and intend to continue to do so (or would maintain a common residence but for an assignment abroad or other employment-related, financial, or similar obstacle);

(3) Are at least 18 years of age and mentally competent to consent to a contract;

(4) Share responsibility for a significant measure of each other's financial obligations;

(5) Are not married or joined in a civil union to anyone else;

(6) Are not the domestic partner of anyone else;

(7) Are not related in a way that, if they were of opposite sex, would prohibit legal marriage in the U.S. jurisdiction in which the domestic partnership was formed;

(8) Are willing to certify, if required by the agency, that they understand that willful falsification of any documentation required to establish that an individual is in a domestic partnership may lead to disciplinary action and the recovery of the cost of benefits received related to such falsification, as well as constitute a criminal violation under 18 U.S.C. 1001, and that the method for securing such certification, if required, will be determined by the agency; and

(9) Are willing promptly to disclose, if required by the agency, any dissolution or material change in the status of the domestic partnership.

Employeemeans an employee as defined in section 2105 of title 5, United States Code.

Executive agencymeans an Executive agency as defined in 5 U.S.C. 105 but does not include the Government Accountability Office.

Federally-sponsored child care centermeans a child care center located in a building or space that is owned or leased by the Federal Government.

OPMmeans the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

§ 792.203Child care subsidy programs; eligibility.

(a)(1) An Executive agency may establish a child care subsidy program in which the agency uses appropriated funds, in accordance with this subpart, to assist lower-income employees of the agency with their child care costs. The assistance may be provided for both full-time and part-time child care, and may include before-and-after-school programs and daytime summer programs.

(2) Two or more agencies may pool their funds to establish a child care subsidy program for the benefit of employees who are served by a Federally-sponsored child care center in a multi-tenant facility.

(3)(i) Except as provided under paragraph (a)(3)(ii) of this section, an agency may impose restrictions on the use of appropriated funds for its child care subsidy program based on consideration of employees' needs, its own staffing needs, the local availability of child care, and other factors as determined by the agency. For example, an agency may decide to restrict eligibility for subsidies to—

(I) Full-time permanent employees;

(II) Employees using an agency on-site child care center;

(III) Employees using full-time child care; or

(IV) Employees using child care in specific locations.

(ii) An agency may not limit the payment of subsidies to only accredited child care providers.

(b) Subject to any restrictions applicable under paragraph (a)(3)(i) of this section, an employee who qualifies as a lower-income employee under the agency's child care subsidy program is eligible to receive a child care subsidy for the care of each child under age 13 or, in the case of a disabled child, under age 18.

§ 792.204Agency responsibilities; reporting requirement.

(a) Before funds may be obligated as provided in this subpart, an agency intending to initiate a child care subsidy program must provide notice to the Subcommittees on Financial Services and General Government of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees, as well as to OPM.

(b) Agencies must notify the committees referred to in paragraph (a) of this section and OPM annually of their intention to provide child care subsidies. Funds may be obligated immediately after the notifications have been made.

(c) Agencies are responsible for tracking the utilization of their funds and reporting the results to OPM in a manner prescribed by OPM.

(d) OPM will produce a biannual report on agencies' use of the authority to pay child care subsidies; however, OPM will collect annual data from the agencies.

§ 792.205Administration of child care subsidy programs.

(a) An agency may administer its child care subsidy program directly or by contract with another entity, using procedures prescribed under the Federal Acquisition Regulations. Regardless of what entity administers the program, the Federal agency is responsible for establishing how eligibility and subsidy amounts will be determined.

(b) An agency contract must specify that any unexpended funds will be returned to the agency after the contract is completed.

§ 792.206Payment of subsidies.

(a) Payment of child care subsidies must be made directly to child care providers, unless one of the following exceptions applies:

(1) In overseas locations, the agency may pay the employee if the provider deals only in foreign currency.

(2) In unique circumstances, an agency may obtain written permission from OPM to pay the employee directly.

(b) An agency may make advance payments to a child care provider in certain circumstances, such as when the provider requires payment up to one month in advance of rendering services. An agency may not make advance payments for more than one month before the employee receives child care services except where an agency has contracted with another entity to administer the child care subsidy program, in which case the agency may advance payments to the entity administering the program as long as the requirements in § 792.205(b) are met.

This action withdraws a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that proposed an airworthiness directive (AD) supersedure, applicable to Honeywell International Inc. TPE331-10 and TPE331-11 series turboprop engines. That action would have required adding 360 first stage turbine disk serial numbers (S/Ns) to the applicability. Since we issued that NPRM, we decided not to supersede AD 2009-17-05, but instead to issue a new NPRM for those additional 360 parts. Accordingly, we withdraw the proposed rule.

A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to add a new airworthiness directive (AD),applicable to Honeywell International Inc. TPE331-10 and TPE331-11 series turboprop engines, was published in theFederal Registeron June 22, 2010 (75 FR 35354). The proposed rule would have added 360 S/Ns to the applicability of AD 2009-17-05. The proposed actions were intended to prevent uncontained failure of the first stage turbine disk and damage to the airplane.

Since we issued that NPRM, we decided not to supersede AD 2009-17-05, as doing so would require us to bring forward the effectivity dates for removal or inspection of the suspect turbine disks listed in the AD. Instead, we are planning to issue a new NPRM that will address the additional 360 turbine disk S/Ns requiring inspection or removal.

Since this action only withdraws a notice of proposed rulemaking, it is neither a proposed nor a final rule and therefore, is not covered under Executive Order 12866, the Regulatory Flexibility Act, or DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979).

In this action, we are proposing to approve San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District (SJVUAPCD) Rule 3170, “Federally Mandated Ozone Nonattainment Fee,” as a revision to SJVUAPCD's portion of the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). Rule 3170 is a local fee rule submitted to address section 185 of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act). EPA is also proposing to approve SJVUAPCD's fee-equivalent program, which includes Rule 3170 and state law authorities that authorize SJVUAPCD to impose supplemental fees on motor vehicles, as an alternative to the program required by section 185 of the Act. We are proposing that SJVUAPCD's alternative fee-equivalent program is not less stringent than the program required by section 185, and, therefore, is approvable, consistent with the principles of section 172(e) of the Act. As part of this action, we are inviting public comment on whether it is appropriate for EPA to consider alternative programs and, if so, what would constitute an approvable alternative program. We are taking comments on these proposals and plan to follow with a final action.

DATES:

Any comments must arrive by August 29, 2011.

ADDRESSES:

Submit comments, identified by docket number EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0571, by one of the following methods:

Instructions:All comments will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online athttp://www.regulations.gov,including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Information that you consider CBI or otherwise protected should be clearly identified as such and should not be submitted throughhttp://www.regulations.govor e-mail.http://www.regulations.govis an “anonymous access” system, and EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send e-mail directly to EPA, your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the public comment. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment.

Docket:Generally, documents in the docket for this action are available electronically athttp://www.regulations.govand in hard copy at EPA Region IX, 75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, California. While all documents in the docket are listed athttp://www.regulations.gov,some information may be publicly available only at the hard copy location (e.g., copyrighted material, large maps), and some may not be publicly available in either location (e.g., CBI). To inspect the hard copy materials, please schedule an appointment during normal business hours with the contact listed in theFOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACTsection.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Lily Wong, EPA Region IX, (415) 947-4114,wong.lily@epa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Throughout this document, “we,” “us” and “our” refer to EPA.

Table of ContentsI. What did the State submit?II. What action is EPA taking?III. BackgroundIV. What is the legal rationale for this action?V. What is EPA's analysis of SJVUAPCD's alternative program?VI. Proposed ActionVII. Statutory and Executive Order ReviewsI. What did the State submit?

On May 19, 2011, SJVUAPCD adopted Rule 3170 as part of SJVUAPCD's alternative fee-equivalent program. On June 14, 2011, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) submitted SJVUAPCD's alternative fee-equivalent program, including Rule 3170 and various state law authorities, to EPA. On June 23, 2011, EPA determined that the submittal met the completeness criteria in 40 CFR Part 51 Appendix V, which must be met before formal EPA review.

II. What action is EPA taking?

EPA is proposing to approve SJVUAPCD Rule 3170 as a revision to SJVUAPCD's portion of the California SIP. Rule 3170 is a local rule that applies to all major stationary sources emitting VOCs and/or NOX. Rule 3170 requires certain major stationary sources to pay a fee for each ton of VOCs or NOXemitted in excess of 80% of baseline emissions. Rule 3170 includes an exemption for “clean units” and a different calculation of baseline emissions than specified by CAA section 185. Therefore, Rule 3170 also requires SJVUAPCD to track actual NOXand VOC emissions from all major stationary sources of NOXand VOCs and demonstrate that it received revenues, pursuant to an alternative mechanism described below, equivalentto those that would be imposed through section 185 of the Act without the “clean unit” exemption, and with a baseline calculated in a manner consistent with CAA 185. Rule 3170 also requires SJVUAPCD to impose additional fees on major stationary sources to remedy any shortfall in revenue. In this action, EPA is also proposing to approve SJVUAPCD's fee-equivalent program as an alternative to the program required by section 185 of the Act. SJVUAPCD's alternative fee-equivalent program includes Rule 3170 and state law authorities that authorize the District to impose a $12 supplemental fee on motor vehicle registrations. We are proposing that SJVUAPCD's alternative fee-equivalent program is not less stringent than the program required by section 185, and, therefore, is approvable, consistent with the principles of section 172(e) of the Act as explained more fully below. We are taking comments on these proposals and plan to follow with a final action.

In a separate interim final action, published in the Rules section in today'sFederal Register, we are deferring sanctions that would otherwise apply to the SJVUAPCD.

III. BackgroundSection 185 Fees

Under Sections 182(d)(3), (e), (f) and 185 of the Act, States with ozone nonattainment areas classified as severe or extreme are required to submit a revision to the SIP which requires major stationary sources of VOC or NOXto pay a fee for each ton of VOC or NOXemitted in excess of 80% of baseline emissions.1Under section 185(a) of the Act, the SIP revision must provide that the fees be paid, if the area to which the SIP revision applies has failed to attain the 1-hour ozone standard by the applicable attainment date. A source's baseline emissions are its actual emissions during the required attainment year. The fee rate is $5,000 per ton in 1990 dollars, which must be adjusted for inflation based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI).

1VOCs help produce ground-level ozone and smog, which harm human health and the environment. NOXhelps produce ground-level ozone, smog and particulate matter, which harm human health and the environment.

San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District

SJVUAPCD is an extreme nonattainment area for the 1-hour ozone standard, and therefore, California was required under sections 182(d)(3), (e) and (f) to develop and submit a SIP revision meeting the requirements of section 185, which are discussed above. In San Joaquin Valley, under California law, the SJVUAPCD is responsible for developing rules, such as Rule 3170, that are intended to meet CAA SIP requirements. Such rules are then submitted to EPA after adoption by CARB, which is the State agency responsible for SIP matters on behalf of the State of California.

CARB previously submitted an earlier version of SJVUAPCD Rule 3170 to EPA. EPA took final action on this earlier version of Rule 3170 on January 13, 2010. (75 FR 1716). This final action was a limited approval/limited disapproval because, while EPA found that the rule strengthened the SIP, EPA also found that it did not fully comply with the requirements of section 185. EPA identified the following deficiencies as preventing full approval: (i) An exemption for units that began operation after the attainment year; (ii) an exemption for “clean units;” (iii) the definition of the baseline period as two consecutive years; (iv) a provision to allow averaging of baseline emissions over 2-5 years); and (v) a definition of “major source” inconsistent with the CAA. Because our action was a limited approval and a limited disapproval, our action started sanctions clocks under section 179 of the Act and 40 CFR 52.31.

On June 14, 2011, CARB submitted SJVUAPCD's alternative fee-equivalent program, including amended Rule 3170 as adopted on May 19, 2011 and other state law authorities, to address deficiencies identified in EPA's limited disapproval, to stop the sanctions clocks, and to satisfy SJVUAPCD's obligations under section 185 of the Act.

IV. What is the legal rationale for equivalent alternative programs?

EPA is proposing that states can meet the 1-hour ozone section 185 obligation through a SIP revision containing either the fee program prescribed in section 185 of the Act, or an equivalent alternative program. As further explained below, EPA is proposing that an alternative program may be acceptable if EPA determines, through notice-and-comment rulemaking, that it is consistent with the principles of section 172(e) of the CAA.2

2EPA has previously set forth this reasoning in a memorandum from Stephen D. Page, Director, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, to Air Division Directors, “Guidance on Developing Fee Programs Required by Clean Air Act Section 185 for the 1-hour Ozone NAAQS,” January 5, 2010. On July 1, 2011, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals vacated this guidance, on the ground that it was final agency action for which notice-and-comment rulemaking procedures were required.NRDCv.EPA,No. 10-1056, 2011 WL 2601560, C.A.D.C. 2011. In today's notice, we are applying the court's directive to follow the rulemaking requirements set forth in the Administrative Procedures Act to inform our consideration of section 185 and alternative fee programs. We are therefore inviting the public to comment on whether it is appropriate for EPA to consider an alternative program and, if so, whether SJVUAPCD's program would constitute an approvable alternative program under the CAA.

Section 172(e) is an anti-backsliding provision of the CAA that requires EPA to develop regulations to ensure that controls in a nonattainment area are “not less stringent” than those that applied to the area before EPA revised a national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) to make it less stringent. In the Phase 1 ozone implementation rule for the 1997 ozone NAAQS published on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23951), EPA determined that although section 172(e) does not directly apply where EPA has strengthened the NAAQS, as it did in 1997, it was reasonable to apply the same anti-backsliding principle that would apply to the relaxation of a standard for the transition from the 1-hour NAAQS to the more stringent 1997 8-hour NAAQS. As part of applying the principles in section 172(e) for purposes of the transition from the 1-hour standard to the 1997 8-hour standard, EPA can either require states to retain programs that applied for purposes of the 1-hour standard, or alternatively can allow states to adopt alternative programs, but only if such alternatives are determined through notice-and-comment rulemaking to be “not less stringent” than the mandated program.

EPA has identified three possible types of alternative programs that could satisfy the section 185 requirement: (i) Those that achieve the same emissions reductions; (ii) those that raise the same amount of revenue and establish a process where the revenues would be used to pay for emission reductions that will further improve ozone air quality; and (iii) those that would be equivalent through a combination of both emission reductions and revenues. Accordingly, we are proposing to determine through notice-and-comment rulemaking, that States can demonstrate an alternative program's equivalency by comparing expected fees and/or emissions reductions directly attributable to application of section 185 to the expected fees and/or emissions reductions from the proposed alternative program. Under an alternative program, states might opt to shift the fee burden from a specific set of major stationary sources to non-major sources, such as owners of mobile sources that also contribute to ozone formation. EPA also believes that alternative programs, if approved as “not less stringent” than the section 185fee program, would encourage 1-hour ozone NAAQS nonattainment areas to reach attainment as effectively and expeditiously as a section 185 fee program, if not more so, and therefore satisfy the CAA's goal of attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS.

In sum, in order for EPA to approve an alternative program as satisfying the 1-hour ozone section 185 fee program SIP revision requirement, the state must demonstrate that the alternative program is not less stringent than the otherwise applicable section 185 fee program by collecting fees equal to or exceeding the fees that would have been collected under 185.

V. What is EPA's analysis of SJVUAPCD's alternative program?Summary of SJVUAPCD's Alternative Program

SJVUAPCD's alternative fee-equivalent program consists of Rule 3170 and additional state law materials, including California Assembly Bill 2522 (“AB2522”), now codified at California Health and Safety Code 40610-40613. Rule 3170 applies to major stationary sources of VOCs and NOX, which in the SJVUAPCD are sources that emit 10 tons per year or more of either pollutant. Rule 3170 differs from CAA section 185 because it exempts “clean units” from the assessment of fees and because it allows baseline emissions to be calculated over a multi-year period, rather than a single year as provided in CAA section 185.3Because these differences will likely affect the amount of fees collected from major stationary sources, SJVUAPCD's alternative fee-equivalent program provides for the collection of additional fees from motor vehicle registrations, specifically, $12 per year per motor vehicle, as authorized by California AB2522. (Cal. Health and Safety Code §§ 40610-40613).

3The CAA and EPA's Section 185 baseline guidance (referenced below in this section) allow for alternative baseline periods only if a source's emissions are irregular, cyclical, or otherwise vary significantly from year to year.

Rule 3170 requires the Air Pollution Control Officer (APCO) to prepare and submit to EPA an “Annual Fee Equivalency Demonstration Report” to show that the total annual fees collected from stationary sources and motor vehicle registrations are at least equal to the amount of annual fees that would have been collected from stationary sources under a fee program as prescribed in section 185 of the Act. If the report shows that the actual collected funds are insufficient to demonstrate equivalency, Rule 3170 requires the collection of additional fees from stationary sources to make up the shortfall. EPA's technical support document (TSD) has more information about SJVUAPCD's alternative fee-equivalent program.

How is EPA evaluating SJVUAPCD's alternative program?

Generally, SIP rules must be enforceable (see section 110(a) of the Act). Guidance and policy documents that we use to evaluate enforceability requirements consistently include the following:

Also, SIP revisions must not interfere with any applicable requirement concerning attainment and reasonable further progress (RFP) or any other applicable requirement of the Act (CAA 110(l))).

SJVUAPCD's alternative fee-equivalent program must also be evaluated against section 185 of the Act, as described above under section III of this document. EPA also developed the following guidance on establishing baselines under section 185:

4. Memorandum from William Harnett, Director of the Air Quality Policy Division to the Regional Air Division Directors, entitled, “Guidance on Establishing Emissions Baselines under Section 185 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) for Severe and Extreme Ozone Nonattainment Areas that Fail to Attain the 1-hour Ozone NAAQS by their Attainment Date,” March 21, 2008.4

4This guidance can be found at:http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t1/memoranda/20080321_harnett_emissions_basline.pdf.

Does SJVUAPCD's alternative program meet the evaluation criteria?

We believe SJVUAPCD's alternative fee-equivalent program is consistent with the relevant policy and guidance regarding enforceability, SIP relaxations, and sections 172(e) and 185 of the Act.

First, we propose to determine that our approval of Rule 3170 as revised would comply with CAA sections 110(l) because the proposed SIP revision would not interfere with the on-going process for ensuring that requirements for RFP and attainment of the NAAQS are met, and is more stringent than the version previously approved into the SIP because it corrects the previously-identified deficiencies.

Second, EPA is proposing to find that SJVUAPCD has met its 1-hour ozone NAAQS section 185 obligation through its alternative fee-equivalent program, which includes Rule 3170 and additional state law authorities. Specifically, EPA is proposing to find that SJVUAPCD's alternative fee-equivalent program is acceptable because, consistent with the principles of section 172(e), it is not less stringent than the requirements of section 185.

The version of Rule 3170 we are proposing to approve today contains two provisions that are not directly consistent with section 185: (1) An exemption for “clean units;” and (2) an allowance for an alternate baseline period of two consecutive years (2006-2010) if the APCO determines it would be more representative of normal operations. As described below, EPA has determined that SJVUAPCD's alternative fee-equivalent program will make up for any shortfall in collected funds that might result from these two provisions and provides adequate enforcement and oversight mechanisms, as well as a remedy to address any shortfalls, to assure equivalency.

SJVUAPCD's alternative fee-equivalent program provides for the collection of additional fees from motor vehicle registrations, specifically, $12 per year per motor vehicle. This collection of motor vehicle registration fees is authorized by California AB2522 (now codified at Health and Safety Code 40610-40613). AB2522 also requires SJVUAPCD to use these revenues to fund incentive-based programs resulting in NOXand VOC emissions reductions in the San Joaquin Valley. Rule 3170 requires the APCO to implement a system to track all information with respect to emissions data, the calculation, assessment, and collection of fees from stationary sources, as well as tracking of the amount of collected motor vehicle registration fees. The APCO is required to prepare and submit to EPA an “Annual Fee Equivalency Demonstration Report” that shows that the sum of the total fees collected from stationary sources and motor vehicle registrations are equal to or greater than the fees that would have been collected under a direct implementation of section 185. In the event that the annual equivalency report shows insufficient funds collected (i.e., a shortfall), Rule 3170 requires the collection ofadditional funds from stationary sources.

SJVUAPCD has demonstrated that its alternative fee-equivalent program will be at least as stringent as a CAA section 185 fee program. Rule 3170 provides SJVUAPCD the authority to collect fees from certain major sources. To the extent that Rule 3170 differs from CAA section 185 by exempting certain major stationary sources and allowing a different baseline calculation, AB2522 allows SJVUACPD to assess supplemental motor vehicle registration fees equivalent to those that would be collected through a straight section 185 fee program, and requires SJVUAPCD to use those revenues to fund incentive-based programs resulting in NOXand VOC emissions reductions in the San Joaquin Valley. Although we are not approving AB2522 into the SIP, Rule 3170 provides adequate oversight and enforcement mechanisms through the Annual Fee Equivalency Demonstration Report and the shortfall remedy to assure that SJVUAPCD's fee-equivalent alternative program will be at least as stringent as a section 185 fee program. We therefore conclude that SJVUAPCD's alternative fee-equivalent program is consistent with the principles of CAA section 172(e) and not less stringent than the requirements of CAA section 185 because it will result in collection of fees equal to the fees that would be collected under section 185. Based upon SJVUAPCD's demonstration that its alternative fee-equivalent program is not less stringent than a section 185 program, EPA proposes to approve Rule 3170 into the California SIP on the basis that SJVUAPCD's alternative fee-equivalent program meets the requirements of sections 172(e) and 185 of the Act.

The TSD has more information on our evaluation.

VI. Proposed Action

Because EPA believes SJVUAPCD Rule 3170 fulfills all relevant requirements, we are proposing to approve Rule 3170 as a SIP revision under section 110(k)(3) of the Act. EPA believes that SJVUAPCD's alternative fee-equivalent program is not less stringent than the requirements set forth in section 185 of the Act, therefore we are proposing to approve SJVUAPCD's alternative fee-equivalent program consisting of Rule 3170 and state law authorities as fulfilling the requirements of sections 185 and 172(e) of the Act.

We will accept comments from the public on these proposals for the next 30 days. Unless we receive convincing new information during the comment period, we intend to publish a final approval action that will incorporate Rule 3170 into the federally enforceable SIP. Our final action would address the CAA section 185 requirements for the 1-hour ozone standard and therefore would permanently terminate the sanctions clocks associated with our January 13, 2010 action on the effective date of the final approval.

VII. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve State choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. Accordingly, this proposed action merely proposes to approve State law as meeting Federal requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law. For that reason, this proposed action:

• Is not a “significant regulatory action” subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993);

• Does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501et seq.);

• Is certified as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601et seq.);

• Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);

• Does not have Federalism implications as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);

• Is not an economically significant regulatory action based on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997);

• Is not a significant regulatory action subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);

• Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; and

• Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to address disproportionate human health or environmental effects with practical, appropriate, and legally permissible methods under Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).

In addition, this proposed action does not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000), because the SIP is not approved to apply in Indian country located in the State, and EPA notes that it will not impose substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

On October 27, 2009, FEMA published in theFederal Registera proposed rule that contained an erroneous table. This notice provides corrections to that table, to be used in lieu of the information published at 74 FR 55168. The table provided here represents the flooding sources, location of referenced elevations, effective and modified elevations, and communities affected for Peoria County, Illinois, and Incorporated Areas. Specifically, it addresses the following flooding sources: Dry Run Creek, Illinois River, and Kickapoo Creek.

These proposed BFEs and modified BFEs, together with the floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are minimum requirements. They should not be construed to mean that the community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These proposed elevations are used to meet the floodplain management requirements of the NFIP and also are used to calculate the appropriate flood insurance premium rates for new buildings built after these elevations are made final, and for the contents in those buildings.

Corrections

In the proposed rule published at 74 FR 55168, in the October 27, 2009, issue of theFederal Register, FEMA published a table under the authority of 44 CFR 67.4. The table, entitled “Peoria County, Illinois, and Incorporated Areas” addressed the flooding source Illinois River. That table contained inaccurate information as to the location of referenced elevation, effective and modified elevation in feet, or communities affected for that flooding source. In addition, it did not include the flooding sources Dry Run Creek and Kickapoo Creek. In this notice, FEMA is publishing a table containing the accurate information, to address these prior errors. The information provided below should be used in lieu of that previously published.

EffectiveModifiedCommunities affectedPeoria County, Illinois, and Incorporated AreasDry Run CreekAt the downstream side of Swords AvenueNone+481City of West Peoria.At the upstream side of Park RoadNone+511Illinois RiverApproximately 0.57 mile upstream of Marsh Road+455+454City of Chillicothe, City of Pekin, City of Peoria, Unincorporated Areas of Peoria County, Village of Bartonville, Village of Kingston Mines, Village of Mapleton.Approximately 1,400 feet upstream of Moffitt StreetNone+460Kickapoo CreekApproximately 60 feet downstream of Harmon Highway/State Route 116None+473City of Peoria, City of West Peoria, Village of Bellevue.At the downstream side of Farmington RoadNone+480* National Geodetic Vertical Datum.+ North American Vertical Datum.# Depth in feet above ground.⁁ Mean Sea Level, rounded to the nearest 0.1 meter.** BFEs to be changed include the listed downstream and upstream BFEs, and include BFEs located on the stream reach between the referenced locations above. Please refer to the revised Flood Insurance Rate Map located at the community map repository (see below) for exact locations of all BFEs to be changed.Send comments to Luis Rodriguez, Chief, Engineering Management Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street, SW., Washington, DC 20472.ADDRESSESCity of ChillicotheMaps are available for inspection at 908 North 2nd Street, Chillicothe, IL 61523.City of PekinMaps are available for inspection at City Hall, 111 South Capital Street, Pekin, IL 61554.City of PeoriaMaps are available for inspection at 419 Fulton Street, Peoria, IL 61602.City of West PeoriaMaps are available for inspection at 2506 West Rohmann Avenue, West Peoria, IL 61604.Unincorporated Areas of Peoria CountyMaps are available for inspection at the Peoria County Planning and Zoning Department, 324 Main Street, Room 301, Peoria, IL 61602.Village of BartonvilleMaps are available for inspection at the Village Hall, 5912 South Adams Street, Bartonville, IL 61607.Village of BellevueMaps are available for inspection at the Peoria County Planning and Zoning Department, 324 Main Street, Room 301, Peoria, IL 61602.Village of Kingston MinesMaps are available for inspection at the Peoria County Planning and Zoning Department, 324 Main Street, Room 301, Peoria, IL 61602.Village of MapletonMaps are available for inspection at the Peoria County Planning and Zoning Department, 324 Main Street, Room 301, Peoria, IL 61602.(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, “Flood Insurance.”)Dated: July 8, 2011.Sandra K. Knight,Deputy Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administrator, Mitigation, Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.[FR Doc. 2011-19042 Filed 7-27-11; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 9110-12-PDEPARTMENT OF COMMERCENational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration50 CFR Part 679RIN 0648-BA97Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Central Gulf of Alaska Rockfish Program; Amendment 88AGENCY:

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) announces that the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) has submitted Amendment 88 to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Gulf of Alaska (FMP) for review by the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary). If approved, Amendment 88 would establish the Central Gulf of Alaska Rockfish Program (Rockfish Program). This proposed program would allocate exclusive harvest privileges to a select group of License Limitation Program (LLP) license holders who used trawl gear to target Pacific ocean perch, pelagic shelf rockfish, and northern rockfish during specific qualifying years. Amendment 88 would modify the FMP to retain the conservation, management, safety, and economic gains realized under the Rockfish Pilot Program and viability of the Gulf of Alaska fisheries. This action is necessary to replace particular Rockfish Pilot Program regulations that are scheduled to expire at the end of 2011. This action is intended to promote the goals and objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the FMP, and other applicable law.

DATES:

Comments on Amendment 88 must be received on or before September 26, 2011.

ADDRESSES:

Send comments to Glenn Merrill, Assistant Regional Administrator for Sustainable Fisheries, Alaska Region, NMFS,Attn:Ellen Sebastian. You may submit comments, identified by RIN 0648-BA97, by any one of the following methods:

All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted tohttp://www.regulations.govwithout change. All personal identifying information (e.g., name, address) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit confidential business information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.

Electronic copies of Amendment 88 to the FMP, the Regulatory Impact Review, the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, and the Environmental Assessment, prepared for this action are available fromhttp://wwww.regulations.govor from the Alaska Region Web site athttp://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Gwen Herrewig, 907-586-7091.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) requires that each regional fishery management council submit any fishery management plan amendment it prepares to NMFS for review and approval, disapproval, or partial approval by the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary). The Magnuson-Stevens Act also requires that NMFS, upon receiving a fishery management plan amendment, immediately publish a notice in theFederal Registerannouncing that the amendment is available for public review and comment. This document announces that proposed Amendment 88 to the FMP is available for public review and comment.

The groundfish fisheries in the exclusive economic zone of Alaska are managed under the GOA FMP and the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area. These fishery management plans were prepared by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) under the Magnuson-Stevens Act.

Amendment 88 is necessary to replace Central Gulf of Alaska (GOA) Rockfish Pilot Program (Pilot Program) regulations that are scheduled to expire December 31, 2011. The Pilot Program was recommended by the Council in June 2005 as Amendment 68 to the Central GOA FMP. Section 802 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2004 (Pub. L. 108-199) granted NMFS specific authority to manage Central GOA rockfish fisheries, and directed theSecretary, in consultation with the Council, to develop a program that recognizes the historical participation of fishing vessels and fish processors in the Central GOA rockfish fishery. Regulations implementing Amendment 68 were published on November 20, 2006 (71 FR 67210), and are located at 50 CFR Part 679. Fishing began under the Pilot Program on May 1, 2007.

The Council designed the Pilot Program to be used as a demonstration program for a long term Central GOA rockfish program. The Rockfish Program proposed in Amendment 88 meets the requirements for limited access privileges in section 303A of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Amendment 88 would allow for the proposed Rockfish Program to retain the conservation, safety, and economic gains realized under the Pilot Program. It would be similar in the implementation, management, monitoring, and enforcement developed under the Pilot Program. It would also resolve identified issues in the management and viability of the fisheries.

Central GOA Rockfish Program

The Rockfish Program would provide exclusive harvesting privileges for vessels using trawl gear to harvest a specific set of rockfish species and associated species incidentally harvested to those rockfish in the Central GOA, an area from 147° W. long. to 159° W. long. The granting of exclusive harvesting is commonly called rationalization. The rockfish primary species rationalized under the Rockfish Program are northern rockfish, Pacific ocean perch, and pelagic shelf rockfish. The incidentally harvested groundfish taken in the primary rockfish fisheries and which also are rationalized under the Rockfish Program are called the secondary species. The secondary species are Pacific cod, rougheye rockfish, shortraker rockfish, and sablefish that are harvested by vessels using trawl gear. In addition to these secondary species, the Rockfish Program would allocate a portion of the halibut bycatch mortality limit annually specified for the GOA trawl fisheries to Rockfish Program participants. This allocation of bycatch mortality could be used by Rockfish Program participants during harvest activities in the fisheries rationalized under the Rockfish Program.

The Rockfish Program would continue to assign quota share (QS) and cooperative quota (CQ) to participants for primary and secondary species, allow a participant holding an LLP license with Rockfish QS to form a rockfish cooperative with other persons, and allow holders of catcher/processor LLP licenses to opt-out of the fishery. The entry level fishery would continue for harvesters who are not eligible for the Rockfish Program and would be directed fishing for rockfish primary species using longline gear only. Additionally, the Rockfish Program continues to establish sideboard limits, as well as monitoring and enforcement provisions.

If approved, the proposed Rockfish Program would be effective from January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2021. The Council reviewed and considered the duration of the permits under section 303A of the Magnuson-Stevens Act. All permits would expire after 10 years but would be renewed unless the Council takes action to discontinue the Rockfish Program. A formal review of the Rockfish Program by the Council would take place 3 years after the implementation of the program to determine if the program is functioning as intended.

Even though the two programs are similar, the proposed Rockfish Program would change some provisions that were implemented under the Pilot Program. In summary, the proposed Rockfish Program would:

• Change the qualifying years for eligibility for QS from 1996 through 2002 under the Pilot Program to 2000 though 2006 under the Rockfish Program;

• Utilize data from the new qualifying years to determine the allocation of QS and sideboard limits;

• Maintain a small portion of the annual allocation of primary rockfish species for persons not receiving QS to fish in an entry level fishery. The Rockfish Program would restrict the entry level fishery to longline gear only and discontinue the entry level trawl fishery; however, the Rockfish Program would allow participants in the Pilot Program entry level trawl fishery to qualify for QS;

• Relax the requirements to form a cooperative so that a person holding QS would not need to form an association with a specific processor and so that a minimum number of QS holders is not required to form a cooperative;

• Modify the required location where harvesters in cooperatives may deliver rockfish. Under the Rockfish Program, cooperatives could only deliver catch to shorebased processors operating within the boundaries of the City of Kodiak—the traditional rockfish delivery port;

• Require that QS holders form a cooperative to be able to fish in the Rockfish Program and discontinue the limited access fishery “race for fish” that QS holders could participate in under the Pilot Program;

• Establish a catch monitoring and control plan specialist to monitor deliveries; and

• Be authorized for 10 years, from January 1, 2012, until December 31, 2021.

Proposed Amendment 88 would continue management of Central GOA rockfish through an exclusive harvest privilege. Greater security for harvesters in cooperatives would continue to be realized under the Rockfish Program. Although participants that opt out of participating in cooperatives and participants in the entry level fishery would not receive a guaranteed annual catch amount, most harvesters would participate in a cooperative that receives a CQ allocation. A CQ allocation would continue to provide incentives to focus on quality, promote a slower paced fishery, enhance safety by providing a vessel operator more flexibility to choose when to fish, and provide greater stability for processors by spreading out production over a greater period of time.

Public comments are being solicited on proposed Amendment 88 to the GOA FMP through the end of the comment period (seeDATES). NMFS intends to publish this action in theFederal Registerand seek public comment on a proposed rule that would implement Amendment 88, following NMFS' evaluation of the proposed rule under the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Public comments on the proposed rule must be received by the end of the comment period for Amendment 88 to be considered in the approval/disapproval decision on Amendment 88. All comments received by the end of the comment period on Amendment 88, whether specifically directed to the GOA FMP amendment or the proposed rule will be considered in the FMP approval/disapproval decision. Comments received after that date will not be considered in the approval/disapproval decision on the amendment. To be considered, comments must be received, not just postmarked or otherwise transmitted, by the close of business on the last day of the comment period.

Amendment 93 to the Fishery Management Plan for Groundfish of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area (FMP) would amend the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Amendment 80 Program to modify the criteria for forming and participating in a harvesting cooperative. This action is necessary to encourage greater participation in harvesting cooperatives, which enable members to more efficiently target species, avoid areas with undesirable bycatch, and improve the quality of products produced. This action is intended to promote the goals and objectives of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the Fishery Management Plan, and other applicable law.

DATES:

Comments on the amendments must be submitted on or before September 26, 2011.

ADDRESSES:

Send comments to James W. Balsiger, Ph.D., Administrator, Alaska Region, NMFS, Attn: Ellen Sebastian. You may submit comments, identified by “RIN 0648-BA18,” by any one of the following methods:

All comments received are a part of the public record and will generally be posted tohttp://www.regulations.govwithout change. All Personal Identifying Information (e.g., name, address) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or otherwise sensitive or protected information.

Copies of Amendment 93, the Environmental Assessment (EA), Regulatory Impact Review (RIR), and the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)—collectively known as the Analysis—for this action are available from the Alaska Region Web site athttp://alaskafisheries.noaa.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Gwen Herrewig, (907) 586-7091.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson-Stevens Act) requires that each regional fishery management council submit any fishery management plan amendment it prepares to NMFS for review and approval, disapproval, or partial approval by the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary). The Magnuson-Stevens Act also requires that NMFS, upon receiving a fishery management plan amendment, immediately publish a notice in theFederal Registerannouncing that the amendment is available for public review and comment.

The Amendment 80 Program for Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area (BSAI) groundfish fisheries was recommended by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) in June 2006 as Amendment 80 to the FMP. NMFS published a final rule to implement Amendment 80 on September 14, 2007 (72 FR 52668), and fishing began under the Amendment 80 Program in 2008.

The Amendment 80 Program is commonly known as a limited access privilege program. Eligible fishery participants may receive exclusive access to specific fishery resources if specific conditions are met. Under the Amendment 80 Program, NMFS issues a quota share (QS) permit to a person holding the catch history of an original qualifying non-American Fisheries Act trawl catcher/processor that met specific criteria designated by Congress under the Capacity Reduction Program (CRP) (Pub. L. 108-447). NMFS determined that 28 vessels met the criteria specified in the CRP. These vessels comprise the originally qualifying Amendment 80 vessels. Each of the 28 originally qualifying Amendment 80 vessels may be issued a QS permit by NMFS based on their catch history of the six Amendment 80 species (Atka mackerel, Aleutian Islands Pacific ocean perch, flathead sole, Pacific cod, rock sole, and yellowfin sole) in the BSAI, if the Amendment 80 vessel owner applies to NMFS to receive a QS permit.

Under the Amendment 80 Program, NMFS allocates a specific portion of the BSAI total allowable catch (TAC) for harvest by QS holders, the Amendment 80 sector, for each of the six defined Amendment 80 species. In addition, NMFS allocates a specific portion of the allowable bycatch of BSAI halibut, Bristol Bay red king crab, snow crab, and Tanner crab to the Amendment 80 sector. This allowable bycatch is commonly known as prohibited species catch (PSC) because these species may not be retained, but are known to be incidentally taken in BSAI trawl fisheries.

Each year, a person assigns each QS permit, Amendment 80 vessel, and any associated license limitation program (LLP) licenses to either an Amendment 80 cooperative, or the Amendment 80 limited access fishery. Generally, the Amendment 80 Program is intended to facilitate the formation of cooperatives that will receive exclusive harvest privileges for a portion of the Amendment 80 species TAC and PSC known as cooperative quota (CQ). A person who does not choose to join a harvesting cooperative must fish in the Amendment 80 limited access fishery, without an exclusive harvest privilege, and must continue to race for fish with other participants in that fishery.

In order to form a cooperative, the cooperative must apply for a CQ permit by November 1 of the year prior to fishing. The cooperative must be comprised of:

• At least three unique persons not affiliated with one another through direct or indirect ownership of more than 10 percent; and

• At least nine (of the 28 potentially available) QS permits in the Amendment 80 sector must be assigned to the cooperative.

Amendment 93 would result in two modifications to the Amendment 80 Program. First, it would allow a cooperative to form with a minimum of two unique persons holding seven QS permits. The current requirement is that a minimum of three unique persons and nine QS permits must be assigned to a cooperative. Reducing the number ofunique persons and number of QS permits can provide additional opportunities for QS holders to establish cooperative relationships that could reduce the number of participants engaged in the race for fish.

Second, Amendment 93 would require that a person holding multiple QS permits, Amendment 80 vessels, and LLP licenses assign all of those QS permits, vessels, and LLP licenses to either one or more cooperatives or the limited access fishery. Under this proposed change, an Amendment 80 QS permit holder would be prohibited from assigning some QS permits to one or more cooperatives and some to the limited access fishery. Under the current provisions, a vessel owner participating in both a cooperative and the limited access fishery has an incentive to exclude participants in the limited access fishery from joining an existing cooperative or creating an additional cooperative because the vessel owner could lose access to fish that would otherwise be available in the Amendment 80 limited access fishery. This provision would reduce the incentive for a cooperative member to exclude another person from forming a cooperative in order to force them into a race for fish in the limited access fishery. If approved, this provision would not be applicable until the first fishing year 2 years after the effective date of the final rule implementing Amendment 93. For example, if the final rule became effective in October 2011, this requirement would not apply until the start of the 2014 fishing year and QS holders would have to assign all QS permits and vessels to either a cooperative or the limited access fishery by the Amendment 80 annual cooperative application deadline of November 1, 2013.

Public comments are being solicited on proposed Amendment 93 through the end of the comment period (seeDATES). NMFS intends to publish a proposed rule in theFederal Registerfor public comment that would implement Amendment 93, following NMFS evaluation under the Magnuson-Stevens Act procedures. Public comments on the proposed rule must be received by the close of the comment period on Amendment 93 to be considered in the approval/disapproval decision on Amendment 93. All comments received by the end of the comment period on Amendment 93, whether specifically directed to the FMP amendment or the proposed rule, will be considered in the approval/disapproval decision on Amendment 93. Comments received after the end of the public comment period for Amendment 93, even if received within the comment period for the proposed rule, will not be considered in the approval/disapproval decision on the Amendment. To be considered, comments must be received by NMFS, not just postmarked or otherwise transmitted, by the close of business on the last day of the comment period.

This notice announces a forthcoming meeting of a public advisory committee of the Office of Advocacy and Outreach (OAO). Notice of the meetings are provided in accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2). This meeting will be open to the public.

As required by the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, the OAO announces a public meeting of the Advisory Committee on Minority Farmers (Committee) to advise the Secretary of Agriculture on: (1) The implementation of section 2501 of the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990, as amended, 7 U.S.C. 2279; (2) methods of maximizing the participation of minority farmers and ranchers in Department of Agriculture programs; and (3) civil rights activities within the Department as such activities relate to participants in such programs.

DATES:

The meeting will be held on August 11, 2011, and August 12, 2011, from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. and 8 a.m. to 12 p.m., respectively. The meeting will be open to the public for public comment on August 11, 2011, from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m.

The Committee was established pursuant to section 14008 of the Food Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, Public Law 110-246, 122 Stat. 1651, 2208. The Secretary of Agriculture selected a diverse group of members representing a broad spectrum of persons interested in providing solutions to the challenges of the aforementioned agenda topics (1), (2) and (3). Equal opportunity practices were considered in all appointments to the Committee in accordance with USDA policies. The Secretary selected the members in January 2011.

On August 11, 2011, from 9 a.m. to 12 p.m., there will be an opportunity for public comments. Interested persons may present views, orally or in writing, on issues relating to the above agenda topics (1), (2) and (3) before the committee. Written submissions may be submitted to the contact person on or before August 1, 2011. Oral presentations from the public will be scheduled between approximately 9 a.m. to 12 p.m. Those individuals interested in making formal oral presentations should notify the contact person and submit a brief statement of the general nature of the issue they wish to present and the names and addresses of proposed participants. (All oral presentations will be given three minutes. If the number of registrants requesting to speak is greater than what can be reasonably accommodated during the scheduled open public hearing session timeframe, OAO may conduct a lottery to determine the speakers for the scheduled open public hearing session.) The contact person will notify interested persons regarding their request to speak by August 5, 2011.

OAO will make all agenda topics available to the public via the OAO Web site (http://www.outreach.usda.gov/oasdfr) no later than 10 business days before the meeting and at the meeting. OAO welcomes the attendance of the public at its advisory committee meetings and will make every effort to accommodate persons with physical disabilities or special needs. If you require special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Phyllis Morgan at least 7 days in advance of the meeting. OAO is committed to the orderly conduct of the advisory committee meeting. Please visit our Web site athttp://www.outreach.usda.gov/oasdfrfor procedures on public conduct during the advisory committee meeting.

The Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) announces it is inviting proposals for the Food for Progress (FFPr) program. The total resources available are estimated at about $160 million. The FFPr Program is administered by FAS.

DATES:

All applications must be received by 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time October 26, 2011. Applications received after this date will not be considered.

A.Authority:The FFPr program is authorized by the Food for Progress Act of 1985, as amended.

B.Purpose:The FFPr program provides for the donation of U.S. agricultural commodities to developing countries and countries that are emerging democracies that have made commitments to introduce or expand free enterprise in their agricultural economies. Donated commodities are typically “monetized” (or sold on the local market), and the proceeds are usedto fund agricultural development activities.

C.Objectives:For this notice, FAS is concentrating FFPr resources toward achieving two high-level objectives: (1) Increase agricultural productivity and (2) expand trade of agricultural products (domestically, regionally, and internationally). For more information on the two objectives, please see Section V of this notice.

A.Award Size:Grants provided under the FFPr program normally range from $5-$15 million.

B.Type of Award:All awards will be made in the form of competitive grants.

III. Eligibility Information

For eligibility requirements, see the FFPr program regulations (7 CFR 1499.3).

IV. Application and Submission Information

A.Application Content:An applicant for funding under FFPr shall submit an application that contains the information specified in 7 CFR 1499.4 which includes a completed form SF-424, an Introductory Statement, a Plan of Operation, and a proposed budget. Guidance on preparing the Introductory Statement, Plan of Operation, and a budget can be found in the proposal entry module of the Food Aid Information System (FAIS) at the following address:http://www.fas.usda.gov/fais/public.Additionally, the application shall include a plan to monitor the implementation of all program activities, a Performance Monitoring Plan, and a plan to evaluate all activities and report to FAS on the impact, in accordance with the policy found at:http://www.fas.usda.gov/excredits/FoodAid/FFP/MEPolicy.asp.

B.Method of Submission:The entire application package must be submitted electronically to FAS's online proposal entry system, the FAIS, located athttp://www.fas.usda.gov/fais/public.

C.Deadline for Submission:All applications must be received by 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, October 26, 2011. Applications received after this date will not be considered.

D.Frequently Asked Questions:Please see the FAS Web site for frequently asked questions on applying for the Food for Progress program, available at:http://www.fas.usda.gov/excredits/FoodAid/FFP/ApplicationFAQs.asp.

V. Selecting Project Objectives and Results

A.Results Frameworks:In an effort to use scarce resources more strategically, FAS has developed two results frameworks for the FFPr program. The two frameworks correspond to the FFPr program's two high-level objectives: (1) Increase agricultural productivity and (2) expand trade of agricultural products (domestically, regionally, and internationally). Applications that do not contribute to one of these two high-level objectives will not be funded. The results frameworks are available on the FAS Web site at:http://www.fas.usda.gov/excredits/FoodAid/FFP/ResultsFrameworks.pdf.

B.Incorporating Results Into Applications:Applicants must submit an illustration(s) of a framework(s) that shows the intended results for the proposed project. The project framework(s) submitted by the applicant must be consistent with the program-level frameworks that FAS has developed. However, applicants can add or subtract results from/to the frameworks as appropriate but cannot modify any of the remaining results. Within the Introductory Statement, applicants must also provide an assessment of how the proposed project will contribute to the high-level objective(s) of the FFPr program frameworks. The assessment should focus on the country specific context for the project including key problems or barriers that limit an applicant's ability in achieving the high-level objective addressed. The assessment should provide to USDA an understanding of why the application will include results for specific portions of the frameworks and exclude results from others. The assessment will allow USDA to follow the contributions of the application in the frameworks and to make sure the application addresses key problems, barriers, or weaknesses in the country. Applicants should also list strengths in the countries or investments by other donors that explain the rationale for excluding results.

C.Additional Information:For specific guidance on how to incorporate the frameworks into a proposal and for a list of performance management indicators, please see our application guidance at:http://www.fas.usda.gov/excredits/FoodAid/FFP/FrameworkGuidance.asp.

VI. Proposal Review Criteria

A.Review Process:FAS will review all responsive proposals that are submitted by the deadline. FAS will invite comments from other U.S. Government agencies (USG) on its award recommendations, but FAS will make the final determination about which proposals to fund.

B.Criteria:FAS will review and evaluate each proposal using the following criteria:

(e) Does the application include port, warehouse, and handling capacity in country as it relates to the commodity, tonnage, and packaging?

5. Organizational Capability and Experience (18 percent)

(a) Does the application establish the organization's project management capability, including its ability to implement, supervise, and support projects?

(b) Does the applicant have sufficient financial management capability to implement the proposed program?

(c) Does the applicant have past experience or expertise in the program objectives and/or activities proposed?

(d) If the applicant has had programs with USDA or USAID, was this a productive collaboration with positive outcomes?

(e) Is applicant registered in country or does it offer a plan to become registered?

(f) Does the organization have experience working in the country of the proposed program?

6. In-Country Coordination (9 percent)

(a) Does the organization have a working relationship with and support from the recipient government?

(b) Did the organization work with the recipient government to develop the proposed activities?

(c) Does the application explicitly describe its coordination with published USG and host government development strategies?

(d) Does the application describe what other stakeholders (host government, USG, other donors, private sector, etc.) are already doing to address agricultural development, and explain how the proposed program will complement these activities?

(e) Does the proposed program have private and public sector support?

(f) Does the proposed program have established partnerships with and buy-in from beneficiary groups/communities?

7. Sustainability Plan/Objectives (9 percent)

(a) Does the applicant provide a satisfactory plan for continuation of projects beyond Food for Progress support? If the project is not sustainable, is there an explanation?

(b) Does the organization have a plan for securing local support (public, private, other) to maintain programming after the grant's completion?

(c) For an organization that has received previous FFPr grants, does the proposal reference sustainable activities launched under earlier agreements?

8. The following factors will reduce a proposal's score because they reflect negatively on an organization's ability to successfully implement and complete a grant agreement with USDA.

(a) FAS has terminated an agreement with the organization for violations within the last 3 years.

(b) The organization owes USDA a debt that is not covered by a payment plan or other method of resolution.

(c) The organization has submitted late or has not submitted at all two or more required reports in the last three years.

(d) The organization has not responded to FAS's deadlines for documents required to close an agreement on two or more occasions within the last 3 years.

VII. Award Administration Information

1.Award Notices:FAS will notify each applicant in writing of the final decision regarding its application. FAS will send a letter to each approved applicant that will specify the amount of funding. Once the approved applicant receives this letter, FAS will begin negotiations with the applicant to develop a grant agreement. The agreement will incorporate the details of the project as approved by FAS and in accordance with the FFPr program regulations, 7 CFR part 1499.

2.Reporting:An organization receiving funding under the FFPr program will be required to provide quarterly financial reports, semi-annual logistics and monitoring reports, a baseline study, a mid-term evaluation, and a final evaluation report, as provided in the grant agreement. All reports must be submitted using the FAIS. All organizations receiving funding will be required to report against the indicators in the agreement at each reporting cycle. Changes in the original project timelines and adjustments within project budgets must be approved by FAS prior to their implementation.

3.Monitoring and Evaluation:A program participant shall submit to FAS, in the manner specified in the agreement, an annual financial audit in accordance with 7 CFR § 1599.13(d). If FAS requires an annual financial audit with respect to a particular agreement, and FAS provides funds for this purpose, the participant shall arrange for such audit and submit it to FAS, in the manner specified in the agreement. The participant shall provide to FAS additional information or reports relating to the agreement if requested by FAS.

The Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) announces it is inviting applications for the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition program (McGovern-Dole). Total resources are expected to be about $190 million, but are contingent on final FY 2012 appropriations action. Eligible applicants may submit applications through October 26, 2011. The McGovern-Dole program is administered by FAS.

DATES:

All applications must be received by 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, October 26, 2011. Applications received after this date will not be considered.

A.Authority:The McGovern-Dole program is authorized by the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002, as amended.

B.Purpose:The McGovern-Dole program promotes education, child development, and food security for poorchildren in low-income countries through the donation of U.S. agricultural commodities as well as the provision of financial and technical assistance. The commodities are made available for donation through agreements with Private Voluntary Organizations (PVOs), cooperatives, intergovernmental organizations, and foreign governments. Financial assistance is also provided for administrative and activity costs associated with achieving the objectives of the program.

C.Objectives:For this notice, FAS is concentrating McGovern-Dole program resources toward achieving two objectives: (1) Improve the literacy of school age children and (2) sustaining the benefits made during project implementation to literacy, attendance, and enrollment by graduating the project to the host country. For more information on the objectives, please see Section V of this notice.

D.Priorities:FAS will give priority consideration to otherwise acceptable applications that support results for priority countries and regions listed at:http://www.fas.usda.gov/excredits/FoodAid/FFE/FFEPriorities.asp.FAS will also give priority to requests to continue existing McGovern-Dole projects for non-priority countries and non-priority regions. Applications to continue existing projects must meet all of the criteria described in this notice including incorporation of program objectives.

II. Award Information

A.Award Size:Grants provided under the McGovern-Dole program normally range from $3-$10 million per year.

B.Type of Award:All awards will be made in the form of competitive grants.

III. Eligibility Information

For eligibility requirements, see the McGovern-Dole program regulations (7 CFR 1599.3).

IV. Application and Submission Information

A.Application Content:An applicant for funding under the McGovern-Dole program shall submit an application that contains the information specified in 7 CFR 1599.4, which includes a completed form SF-424, an Introductory Statement, a Plan of Operation, and a proposed budget. Guidance on preparing the Introductory Statement, a Plan of Operation, and a budget can be found in the proposal entry module of the Food Aid Information System (FAIS) at the following address at:http://www.fas.usda.gov/fais/public.Additionally, the application shall include a plan to monitor the implementation of all program activities, a Performance Monitoring Plan, and a plan to evaluate all activities and report to FAS on the impact, in accordance with the policy found at:http://www.fas.usda.gov/excredits/FoodAid/FFE/EvaluationPolicy.asp.

B.Method of Submission:The entire application package must be submitted electronically to FAS's online proposal entry system, the FAIS, located at:http://www.fas.usda.gov/fais/public.

C.Deadline for Submission:All applications must be received by 5 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, October 26, 2011. Applications received after this date will not be considered.

V. Selecting Project Objectives and Results

A.Results Frameworks:In an effort to use scarce resources more strategically, FAS has developed results frameworks for the McGovern-Dole program. This framework corresponds to the highest-level objective that the McGovern-Dole program strives to achieve: improve the literacy of school age children. Applications that do not contribute to this highest-level result will not be funded. However, FAS considers sustaining the benefits made to literacy, attendance, and enrollment of equal importance. Therefore all applications must include a plan to graduate project activities to the host country that consists of specific activities linked to specific results in the framework and timelines for achieving them. A matrix of possible activities that support sustainability as well as the results framework are available on the FAS Web site at:http://www.fas.usda.gov/excredits/FoodAid/FFE/ResultsFrameworks.pdf.

B.Incorporating Results Into Proposals:Applicants must submit an illustration of a framework that shows the intended results for the proposed project. The project framework submitted by the applicant must be consistent with the program-level framework that FAS has developed. However, applicants can add results to or subtract results from the framework as appropriate but cannot modify any of the remaining results. Within the Introductory Statement, applicants must also provide an assessment of how the proposed project will contribute to the high-level objective of the McGovern-Dole program framework as well as how graduation will be achieved. The assessment should focus on the country specific context for the project including key problems or barriers that limit an applicant's ability in achieving the high-level objective. The assessment should provide to USDA an understanding of why the application will include results for specific portions of the frameworks and exclude results from others. The assessment will allow USDA to follow the contributions of the application in the framework and to make sure the application addresses key problems, barriers, or weaknesses in the country. Applicants should also list strengths in the countries or investments by other donors that explain the rationale for excluding results.

C.Additional Information:For specific guidance on how to incorporate the frameworks into an application as well as a list of performance management indicators, both required and optional, please see our application guidance at:http://www.fas.usda.gov/excredits/FoodAid/FFE/FrameworkGuidance.asp.

VI. Application Review Criteria

A.Review Process:FAS will review all responsive applications that are submitted by the deadline. FAS will invite comments from other U.S. governmental agencies on its award recommendations, but FAS will make the final determination about which applications to fund.

B.Criteria:FAS will review and evaluate each application using the following criteria:

1.Program Design and Alignment with the Solicitation (15 percent) including:

(a) Clearly defined objective and activities that are logically tied to the results to be achieved;

(b) Alignment with the McGovern-Dole results framework;

(c) The quality of the project's performance measures, and the degree to which they relate to the objective, deliverables, and proposed approach and activities;

(d) Detailed understanding of the need for the project;

(e) Clearly described project design and explanation of how the applicant will implement the project;

2.In-country coordination (10 percent) including:

(a) An established relationship with the recipient government;

(b) Description of how the applicant will work with the recipient government to implement the project;

(c) Description of what other stakeholders, including other USG agencies (USAID, State,etc.), are doing to address poverty, hunger and deficient primary education in the recipient country, what needs remain, and how the proposed program complements and does not duplicate those activities;

(d) A demonstration that the proposed activities fit into the host government's national food security plans and any education and nutrition plans; and

(e) Demonstrated cooperation with other USG agencies doing development work.

(d) Description of past programs with USDA, USAID, or other USG agency;

(e) Experience working in the country of the proposed project; and

(f) Registration in country or a plan to become registered.

5.Sustainability and Graduation (20 percent) including:

(a) A detailed plan for graduating the project including methods and timelines that are realistic and incorporated into the McGovern-Dole project framework;

(b) A description of the recipient government's financial or in-kind support of the proposed activities will help continue the project beyond the years of the proposal; and

(c) A description of the local community's support for the project and willingness to sustain it.

6.Literacy (20 percent) including:

(a) A description of the activities to be undertaken and how they support the results cited;

(b) Realistic and achievable outputs for the activities described;

(c) Realistic, achievable, and meaningful outcomes relevant to the outputs of all activities;

(d) A description of how the required indicators will be incorporated; and

(e) A full description of all beneficiaries.

7.Program Monitoring and Evaluation (10 percent) including:

(a) Well developed, recent, and clear baselines and target goals;

(b) Clearly described monitoring and evaluation plan sufficient to provide FAS with a full accounting of all activities and indicators; and

(c) Qualified monitoring team.

8.Application Quality (5 percent) including:

(a) Application is complete with all necessary sections;

(b) Application is consistent; and

(c) Application is clear.

9.The following factors will reduce FAS's evaluation of the application because they negatively reflect on an organization's ability to successfully implement and complete a grant agreement with USDA.

(a) FAS has terminated an agreement with the organization for violations within the last three years.

(b) The organization owes USDA a debt that is not covered by a payment plan or other method of resolution.

(c) The organization has submitted late or has not submitted at all two or more required reports in the last three years.

(d) The organization has not responded to FAS`s deadlines for documents required to closeout an agreement on two or more occasions within the last three years.

VII. Award Administration Information

1.Award Notices:FAS will notify each applicant in writing of the final disposition of its application. FAS will send a letter to each approved applicant that will specify the amount of funding. Once the approved applicant receives this letter, FAS will begin negotiations with the applicant to develop a grant agreement. The agreement will incorporate the details of the project as approved by FAS and in accordance with the McGovern-Dole program regulations, 7 CFR part 1599.

2.Reporting:An organization receiving funding under the McGovern-Dole program will be required to provide quarterly financial reports, semi-annual logistics and monitoring reports, project status reports, a baseline study, a mid-term evaluation, and a final evaluation report, as provided in the grant agreement. All reports must be submitted using the FAIS. All organizations receiving funding will be required to report against the indicators in the agreement at each reporting cycle. Changes in the original project timelines and adjustments within project budgets must be approved by FAS prior to their implementation.

3.Monitoring and Evaluation:A program participant shall submit to FAS, in the manner specified in the agreement, an annual financial audit in accordance with 7 CFR 1599.13(d). If FAS requires an annual financial audit with respect to a particular agreement, and FAS provides funds for this purpose, the participant shall arrange for such audit and submit it to FAS, in the manner specified in the agreement. The participant shall provide to FAS additional information or reports relating to the agreement if requested by FAS.

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, the Forest Service is seeking comments from all interested individuals and organizations on the revision of a currently approved information collection, Airplane Pilot Qualifications and Approval Record, Helicopter Pilot Qualifications and Approval Record, Airplane Data Record, and Helicopter Data Record.

DATES:

Comments must be received in writing on or before September 26, 2011 to be assured of consideration. Comments received after that date will be considered to the extent practicable.

Comments also may be submitted via facsimile to 202-205-1401, phone 202-205-1483 or by e-mail to:awhinaman@fs.fed.us.

The public may inspect comments received at USDA Forest Service, Fire and Aviation Management, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20250, during normal business hours. Visitors are encouraged to call ahead to 202-205-1483 to facilitate entry to the building.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Art Hinaman, Assistant Director Aviation, 202-205-1483. Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf(TDD) may call the Federal Relay Service (FRS) at 1-800-877-8339 twenty-four hours a day, every day of the year, including holidays.

Abstract:The Forest Service contracts with approximately 400 vendors a year for commercial aviation services utilized in resource protection and project management. In recent years, the total annual use of contract aircraft and pilots has exceeded 80,000 hours. In order to maintain an acceptable level of safety, preparedness, and cost-effectiveness in aviation operations, Forest Service contracts include rigorous qualifications for pilots and specific condition, equipment, and performance requirements for aircraft as aviation operations are conducted under extremely adverse conditions of weather, terrain, turbulence, smoke reduced visibility, minimally improved landing areas, and congested airspace around wildfires. To ensure agency contracting officers that pilots and aircraft used for aviation operations meet specific Forest Service qualifications and requirements for aviation operations, prospective contract pilots fill out one of the following Forest Service forms:

When inspecting the aircraft for contract compliance. Based upon the approval(s) documented on the form(s), each contractor pilot and aircraft receives an approval card. The Forest Service personnel verify possession of properly approved cards before using contracted pilots and aircraft.

Information collected on these forms includes:

• Name.

• Address.

• Certification numbers.

• Employment history.

• Medical Certification.

• Airplane/helicopter certifications and specifications.

• Accident/violation history.

Without the collected information, Forest Service contracting officers, as well as Forest Service pilot and aircraft inspections, cannot determine if contracted pilots and aircraft meet the detailed qualification, equipment, and condition requirements essential to safe and effective accomplishment of Forest Service specified flying missions.

Without a reasonable basis to determine pilot qualifications and aircraft capability, Forest Service employees would be exposed to hazardous conditions. The data collected documents the approval of contract pilots and aircraft for specific Forest Service aviation missions. Information will be collected and reviewed by contracting officers or their designated representatives, including aircraft inspectors, to determine whether the aircraft and/or pilot(s) meet all contract specifications in accordance with FS Handbook 5709.16, chapter 10, sections 15 and 16. Forest Service pilot and aircraft inspectors maintain the collected information in Forest Service regional offices. The Forest Service, at times, shares the information with the Department of the Interior, Aviation Management Directorate, as each organization accepts contract inspections conducted by the other.

Estimate of Annual Burden:60 minutes.

Type of Respondents:Vendors/Contractors.

Estimated Annual Number of Respondents:2100.

Estimated Annual Number of Responses per Respondent:1.

Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents:2100 hours.

Comment Is Invited.Comment is invited on: (1) Whether this collection of information is necessary for the stated purposes and the proper performance of the functions of the Agency, including whether the information will have practical or scientific utility; (2) the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including the use of automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

All comments received in response to this notice, including names and addresses when provided, will be a matter of public record. Comments will be summarized and included in the submission request toward Office of Management and Budget approval.

The Lynn Canal/Icy Straits Resource Advisory Committee will meet in Juneau, Alaska, August 12-13, 2011. The purpose of the meeting is to review, discuss, evaluate, prioritize and recommend projects for approval by the Forest Supervisor.

DATES:

The meeting will be held Friday, August 12, 2011 from 8:30-4:30 and Saturday, August 13, 2011 from 9-3 unless additional time is necessary.

The meeting is open to the public. Committee discussion is limited to Forest Service staff and Committee members. However, public input opportunity will be provided and individuals will have the opportunity to address the Committee at that time.

The Allegheny Resource Advisory Committee will meet in Clarendon, Pennsylvania. The committee is authorized under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act (Pub. L. 110-343) (the Act) and operates in compliance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act. The purpose of the committee is to improve collaborative relationships and to provide advice and recommendations to the Forest Service concerning projects and funding consistent with the title II of the Act. The meeting is open to the public. The purpose of the meeting is to review projects proposals submitted for funding consideration for completeness in preparation for the upcoming decision-making process.

DATES:

The meeting will be held August 10, 2011, at 9:30 a.m.

ADDRESSES:

The meeting will be held at the Mead Township Building located on Mead Blvd., in Clarendon, Pennsylvania. Written comments may be submitted as described underSUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

All comments, including names and addresses when provided, are placed in the record and are available for public inspection and copying. The public may inspect comments received at 4 Farm Colony Drive, Warren, Pennsylvania 16365. Please call ahead to Kathy Mohney at (814) 728-6298 to facilitate entry into the building to view comments.

Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, Monday through Friday. Requests for reasonable accommodation for access to the facility or proceedings may be made by contacting the person listed inFor Further Information.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The following business will be conducted: review and familiarize committee members with the process for preparing and submitting proposals for funding consideration.

Anyone who would like to bring related matters to the attention of the committee may file written statements with the committee staff before or after the meeting. The agenda will include time for people to make oral statements of three minutes or less. Individuals wishing to make an oral statement should request in writing by August 8, 2011, to be scheduled on the agenda. Written comments and requests for time for oral comments must be sent to 4 Farm Colony Drive, Warren, Pennsylvania 16365, or by e-mail tokmohney@fs.fed.us,or via facsimile to (814) 726-1462.

The Department of Commerce (“the Department”) has received requests to conduct administrative reviews of various antidumping and countervailing duty orders and findings with June anniversary dates. In accordance with the Department's regulations, we are initiating those administrative reviews. The Department received requests to revoke two antidumping duty orders in part and to defer the initiation of an administrative review for two antidumping duty orders.

The Department has received timely requests, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(b), for administrative reviews of various antidumping and countervailing duty orders and findings with June anniversary dates. The Department also received timely requests to revoke in part the antidumping duty orders on Polyethylene Terephthalate Film, Sheet, and Strip from South Korea for one exporter and on Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from the People's Republic of China for one exporter. In addition, the Department received requests to defer for one year the initiation of the June 1, 2010, through May 31, 2011, administrative reviews of the antidumping duty orders on Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from the People's Republic of China with respect to two exporters and on Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from the People's Republic of China with respect to one exporter in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(c). The Department received no objections to these requests from any party cited in 19 CFR 351.213(c)(1)(ii).

All deadlines for the submission of various types of information, certifications, or comments or actions by the Department discussed below refer to the number of calendar days from the applicable starting time.

Notice of No Sales

If a producer or exporter named in this notice of initiation had no exports, sales, or entries during the period of review (“POR”), it must notify the Department within 60 days of publication of this notice in theFederal Register. All submissions must be made in accordance with 19 CFR 351.303 and are subject to verification in accordance with section 782(i) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (“Act”). Six copies of the submission should be submitted to the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, International Trade Administration, Room 1870, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230. Further, in accordance with 19 CFR 351.303(f)(3)(ii), a copy of each request must be served on every party on the Department's service list.

Respondent Selection

In the event the Department limits the number of respondents for individual examination for administrative reviews, the Department intends to select respondents based on U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) data for U.S. imports during the POR. We intend to release the CBP data under Administrative Protective Order (“APO”) to all parties having an APO within seven days of publication of this initiation notice and to make our decision regarding respondent selection within 21 days of publication of thisFederal Registernotice. The Department invites comments regarding the CBP data and respondent selection within five days of placement of the CBP data on the record of the applicable review.

In the event the Department decides it is necessary to limit individual examination of respondents and conduct respondent selection under section 777A(c)(2) of the Act:

In general, the Department has found that determinations concerning whether particular companies should be “collapsed” (i.e.,treated as a single entity for purposes of calculating antidumping duty rates) require a substantial amount of detailed information and analysis, which often require follow-up questions and analysis. Accordingly, the Department will not conduct collapsing analyses at the respondent selection phase of this review and will not collapse companies at the respondent selection phase unless there has been a determination to collapse certain companies in a previous segment of this antidumping proceeding (i.e.,investigation, administrative review, new shipper review or changed circumstances review). For any company subject to this review, if the Department determined, or continued to treat, that company as collapsed with others, the Department will assume that such companies continue to operate in the same manner and will collapse them for respondent selection purposes. Otherwise, the Department will not collapse companies for purposes of respondent selection. Parties are requested to (a) Identify which companies subject to review previously were collapsed, and (b) provide a citation to the proceeding in which they were collapsed. Further, if companies are requested to complete the Quantity and Value Questionnaire for purposes of respondent selection, in general each company must report volume and value data separately for itself. Parties should not include data for any other party, even if they believe they should be treated as a single entity with that other party. If a company was collapsed with another company or companies in the most recently completed segment of this proceeding where the Department considered collapsing that entity, complete quantity and value data for that collapsed entity must be submitted.

Separate Rates

In proceedings involving non-market economy (“NME”) countries, the Department begins with a rebuttable presumption that all companies within the country are subject to government control and, thus, should be assigned a single antidumping duty deposit rate. It is the Department's policy to assign all exporters of merchandise subject to an administrative review in an NME country this single rate unless an exporter can demonstrate that it is sufficiently independent so as to be entitled to a separate rate.

To establish whether a firm is sufficiently independent from government control of its export activities to be entitled to a separate rate, the Department analyzes each entity exporting the subject merchandise under a test arising from theFinal Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Sparklers from the People's Republic of China,56 FR 20588 (May 6, 1991), as amplified byFinal Determination of Sales at Less Than Fair Value: Silicon Carbide from thePeople's Republic of China,59 FR 22585 (May 2, 1994). In accordance with the separate-rate criteria, the Department assigns separate rates to companies in NME cases only if respondents can demonstrate the absence of bothde jureandde factogovernment control over export activities.

All firms listed below that wish to qualify for separate-rate status in the administrative reviews involving NME countries must complete, as appropriate, either a separate-rate application or certification, as described below. For these administrative reviews, in order to demonstrate separate-rate eligibility, the Department requires entities for whom a review was requested, that were assigned a separate rate in the most recent segment of this proceeding in which they participated, to certify that they continue to meet the criteria for obtaining a separate rate. The Separate Rate Certification form will be available on the Department's Web site athttp://www.trade.gov/iaon the date of publication of thisFederal Registernotice. In responding to the certification, please follow the “Instructions for Filing the Certification” in the Separate Rate Certification. Separate Rate Certifications are due to the Department no later than 60 calendar days after publication of thisFederal Registernotice. The deadline and requirement for submitting a Certification applies equally to NME-owned firms, wholly foreign-owned firms, and foreign sellers who purchase and export subject merchandise to the United States.

Entities that currently do not have a separate rate from a completed segment of the proceeding1should timely file a Separate Rate Application to demonstrate eligibility for a separate rate in this proceeding. In addition, companies that received a separate rate in a completed segment of the proceeding that have subsequently made changes, including, but not limited to, changes to corporate structure, acquisitions of new companies or facilities, or changes to their official company name,2should timely file a Separate Rate Application to demonstrate eligibility for a separate rate in this proceeding. The Separate Rate Status Application will be available on the Department's Web site athttp://www.trade.gov/iaon the date of publication of thisFederal Registernotice. In responding to the Separate Rate Status Application, refer to the instructions contained in the application. Separate Rate Status Applications are due to the Department no later than 60 calendar days of publication of thisFederal Registernotice. The deadline and requirement for submitting a Separate Rate Status Application applies equally to NME-owned firms, wholly foreign-owned firms, and foreign sellers that purchase and export subject merchandise to the United States.

1Such entities include entities that have not participated in the proceeding, entities that were preliminarily granted a separate rate in any currently incomplete segment of the proceeding (e.g.,an ongoing administrative review, new shipper review,etc.) and entities that lost their separate rate in the most recently complete segment of the proceeding in which they participated.

2Only changes to the official company name, rather than trade names, need to be addressed via a Separate Rate Application. Information regarding new trade names may be submitted via a Separate Rate Certification.

For exporters and producers who submit a separate-rate status application or certification and subsequently are selected as mandatory respondents, these exporters and producers will no longer be eligible for separate-rate statusunlessthey respond to all parts of the questionnaire as mandatory respondents.

Initiation of Reviews

In accordance with section 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i), we are initiating administrative reviews of the following antidumping and countervailing duty orders and findings. We intend to issue the final results of these reviews not later than June 30, 2012. Also in accordance with 19 CFR 351.213(c), we are deferring for one year the initiation of June 1, 2010, through May 31, 2011, administrative reviews of the antidumping duty orders on Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from the People's Republic of China with respect to two exporters and on Folding Metal Tablesand Chairs from the People's Republic of China with respect to one exporter.

Duringany administrative review covering all or part of a period falling between the first and second or third and fourth anniversary of the publication of an antidumping duty order under 19 CFR 351.211 or a determination under 19 CFR 351.218(f)(4) to continue an order or suspended investigation (after sunset review), the Secretary, if requested by a domestic interested party within 30 days of the date of publication of the notice ofinitiation of thereview, willdetermine, consistentwithFAG Italia S.p.A.v.United States,291 F.3d 806 (Fed. Cir. 2002), as appropriate, whether antidumping duties have been absorbed by an exporter or producer subject to the review if the subject merchandise is sold in the United States through an importer that is affiliated with suchexporter or producer. The request must include the name(s) of the exporter or producer for which the inquiry is requested.

3If one of the above-named companies does not qualify for a separate rate, all other exporters of Chlorinated Isocyanurates from the People's Republic of China (“PRC”) who have not qualified for a separate rate are deemed to be covered by this review as part of the single PRC entity of which the named exporters are a part.

4If one of the above-named companies does not qualify for a separate rate, all other exporters of Certain Polyester Staple Fiber from the PRC who have not qualified for a separate rate are deemed to be covered by this review as part of the single PRC entity of which the named exporters are a part.

5If one of the above-named companies does not qualify for a separate rate, all other exporters of Folding Metal Tables and Chairs from the PRC who have not qualified for a separate rate are deemed to be covered by this review as part of the single PRC entity of which the named exporters are a part.

6If the above-named company does not qualify for a separate rate, all other exporters of Silicon Metal from the PRC who have not qualified for a separate rate are deemed to be covered by this review as part of the single PRC entity of which the named exporters are a part.

7If one of the above-named companies does not qualify for a separate rate, all other exporters of Tapered Roller Bearings and Part Thereof, Finished and Unfinished from the PRC who have not qualified for a separate rate are deemed to be covered by this review as part of the single PRC entity of which the named exporters are a part.

For the first administrative review of any order, there will be no assessment of antidumping or countervailing duties on entries of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption during the relevant provisional-measures “gap” period, of the order, if such a gap period is applicable to the POR.

Interested parties must submit applications for disclosure under administrative protective orders in accordance with 19 CFR 351.305. On January 22, 2008, the Department publishedAntidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Documents Submission Procedures; APO Procedures,73 FR 3634 (January 22, 2008). Those procedures apply to administrative reviews included in this notice of initiation. Parties wishing to participate in any of these administrative reviews should ensure that they meet the requirements of these procedures (e.g.,the filing of separate letters of appearance as discussed at 19 CFR 351.103(d)).

Any party submitting factual information in an antidumping duty or countervailing duty proceeding must certify to the accuracy and completeness of that information.Seesection 782(b) of the Act. Parties are hereby reminded that revised certification requirements are in effect for company/government officials as well as their representatives in all segments of any antidumping duty or countervailing duty proceedings initiated on or after March 14, 2011.See Certification of Factual Information to Import Administration During Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: Interim Final Rule,76 FR 7491 (February 10, 2011) (Interim Final Rule), amending 19 CFR 351.303(g)(1) and (2). The formats for the revised certifications are provided at the end of theInterim Final Rule.The Department intends to reject factual submissions in any proceeding segments initiated on or after March 14, 2011 if the submitting party does not comply with the revised certification requirements.

These initiations and this notice are in accordance with section 751(a) of the Act (19 U.S.C. 1675(a)), and 19 CFR 351.221(c)(1)(i).

Dated: July 22, 2011.Christian Marsh,Deputy Assistant Secretary for Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Operations.[FR Doc. 2011-19136 Filed 7-27-11; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 3510-DS-PDEPARTMENT OF COMMERCEInternational Trade Administration[A-570-831]Fresh Garlic From the People's Republic of China: Extension of Time Limit for the Final Results of New Shipper ReviewsAGENCY:

On May 3, 2011, the Department of Commerce (the Department) issued the preliminary intent to rescind the new shipper reviews of fresh garlic from the People's Republic of China for Jining Yifa Garlic Produce Co., Ltd. and Shenzhen Bainong Co., Ltd. for the period of review (POR) November 1, 2009, through April 30, 2010, and Yantai Jinyan Trading Inc. for the POR November 1, 2009, through May 31, 2010.

Section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), and 19 CFR 351.214(i)(1), provide that the Department will issue the preliminary results of a new shipper review of an antidumping duty order within 180 days after the day on which the review was initiated, and the final results of review within 90 days after the date on which the preliminary results were issued. However, if the Department concludes that a new shipper review is extraordinarily complicated, the Department may extend the 180-day period to 300 days, and may extend the 90-day period to 150 days.See19 CFR 351.214(i)(2).

Extension of Time Limit for Final Results

The Department determines that these new shipper reviews involve extraordinarily complicated issues. In particular, since thePreliminary Intent to Rescind,the Department has solicited and received additional information regarding thebona fidesof the new shippers' sales. The Department needs additional time to analyze this new information and to consider the parties' arguments with regard to thebona fidesof the sales under review. Therefore, in accordance with section 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.214(i)(2), the Department is extending the time limit for the final results from 90 days to 111 days. Thus, the final results will now be due no later than August 15, 2011.

We are issuing and publishing this notice in accordance with sections 751(a)(2)(B)(iv) and 777(i)(I) of the Act.

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION:

Notice; receipt of application.

SUMMARY:

Notice is hereby given that Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, 100 Eighth Avenue, SE, St. Petersburg, FL 33701 [Gregg Poulakis, Responsible Party], has applied in due form for a permit to take smalltooth sawfish and listed sea turtle species for purposes of scientific research.

DATES:

Written, telefaxed, or e-mail comments must be received on or before August 29, 2011.

ADDRESSES:

The application and related documents are available for review by selecting “Records Open for Public Comment” from theFeaturesbox on the Applications and Permits for Protected Species (APPS) home page,https://apps.nmfs.noaa.gov,and then selecting File No. 15802 from the list of available applications.

These documents are also available upon written request or by appointment in the following offices:

Written comments on this application should be submitted to the Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division

• By e-mail toNMFS.Pr1Comments@noaa.gov(include the File No. in the subject line of the e-mail),

• By facsimile to (301) 713-0376, or

• At the address listed above.

Those individuals requesting a public hearing should submit a written request to the Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division at the address listed above. The request should set forth the specific reasons why a hearing on this application would be appropriate.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jennifer Skidmore or Colette Cairns, (301) 427-8401.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The subject permit is requested under the authority of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531et seq.) and the regulations governing the taking, importing, and exporting of endangered and threatened species (50 CFR 222-226).

The applicant proposes to monitor smalltooth sawfish (Pristis pectinata) populations of Florida, primarily in the greater Charlotte Harbor estuarine system. Annually, up to 125 sawfish would be captured by gillnet, seine, or longline, handled, measured, passive integrated transponder, roto, and external satellite tagged, tissue and biopsy sampled, examined by ultrasound, and released. Dead sawfish acquired through strandings or from law enforcement confiscations would be sampled for scientific purposes. The applicant also seeks authorization to capture green (Chelonia mydas), hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata), Kemp's ridley (Lepidochelys kempii), leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), and loggerhead (Caretta caretta) sea turtles. Sea turtles would be measured, photographed, and released. The permit is requested for a duration of 5 years.

The SEDAR 26 assessments of the Caribbean stocks of silk snapper, queen snapper, and redtail parrotfish will consist of a series of workshops and webinars: a Data Workshop, an Assessment workshop, a series of Assessment webinars, and a Review Workshop. SeeSUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.

DATES:

The SEDAR 26 Assessment webinars will be held on Thursday, August 25, 2011 from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. (EST) and Tuesday, September 20, 2011 from 1 p.m. to 4 p.m. (EST). The established times may be adjusted as necessary to accommodate the timely completion of discussion relevant to the assessment process. Such adjustments may result in the meeting being extended from, or completed prior to the time established by this notice.

ADDRESSES:

The meeting will be held via webinar. The webinar is open to members of the public. Those interested in participating should contact Julie Neer at SEDAR (SeeFOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) to request an invitation providing webinar access information.

The Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils, in conjunction with NOAA Fisheries and the Atlantic and Gulf States Marine Fisheries Commissions have implemented the Southeast Data, Assessment and Review (SEDAR) process, a multi-step method for determining the status of fish stocks in the Southeast Region. SEDAR is a three-step process including: (1) Data Workshop, (2) Assessment Process utilizing a workshop and webinars and (3) Review Workshop. The product of the Data Workshop is a data report which compiles and evaluates potential datasets and recommends which datasets are appropriate for assessment analyses. The product of the Assessment Process is a stock assessment report which describes the fisheries, evaluates the status of the stock, estimates biological benchmarks, projects future population conditions, and recommends research and monitoring needs. The assessment is independently peer reviewed at the Review Workshop. The product of the Review Workshop is a Summary documenting Panel opinions regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the stock assessment and input data. Participants for SEDAR Workshops are appointed by the Gulf of Mexico, South Atlantic, and Caribbean Fishery Management Councils and NOAA Fisheries Southeast Regional Office and Southeast Fisheries Science Center. Participants include data collectors and database managers; stock assessment scientists, biologists, and researchers; constituency representatives including fishermen, environmentalists, and NGO's; International experts; and staff of Councils, Commissions, and state and federal agencies.

SEDAR 26 Assessment webinars:

Using datasets recommended from the Data Workshop, participants will employ assessment models to evaluate stock status, estimate population benchmarks and management criteria, and project future conditions. Participants will recommend the most appropriate methods and configurations for determining stock status and estimating population parameters.

These meetings are physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to the SEDAR office (seeADDRESSES) at least 5 business days prior to the meetings.

On Tuesday, August 16, the Visioning Committee will meet from 9 a.m. until 5 p.m. There will be a Public Listening Session from 5 until 6:30 p.m. On Wednesday, August 17, the Executive Committee will meet from 8 until 9 a.m. The Council will convene at 9 a.m. Swearing in of new and reappointed Council members and election of Council Officers will be from 9 until 9:15 a.m. From 9:15 a.m. until 4 p.m., the Council will finalize scup, black sea bass, summer flounder, and bluefish management measures for 2012 in conjunction with the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission's (ASMFC) Summer Flounder, Scup, Black Sea Bass, and Bluefish Boards. From 4 until 5 p.m., Research Set Aside priorities will be discussed for 2013. On Thursday August 18, the Council will convene at 8:30 a.m. From 8:30 a.m. until 1 p.m., the Council will conduct its regular Business Session, receive Council Liaison Reports, Monkfish Amendment 6 Overview, Organizational Reports, Executive Director's Report, Science Report, Committee Reports, and any continuing and/or new business.

Agenda items by day for the Council's Committees and the Council itself are: On Tuesday, August 16, the Visioning Committee will discuss an overview of the Visioning project and the expected outcomes, an update on the Communications and Data Gathering Plans, data gathering logistics, maximizing stakeholder participation, review of survey instrument, and discuss any focus group topic areas. There will be a Public Listening Session where the Council invites the public to engage Council leadership and NMFS representatives in a Q & A roundtable session. Those in attendance will be able to ask questions or comment on any issue related to Mid-Atlantic Fisheries Management including annual specifications, ecosystem management, bycatch reduction, catch shares, etc. On Wednesday, August 17, the Executive Committee will meet to receive an update on SSC Ecosystems Sub-Committee activities. New and reappointed Council members will be sworn into office and there will be an election of Council Officers. The Council in conjunction with the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission's (ASMFC) Summer Flounder, Scup, Black Sea Bass and Bluefish Boards will review the Scientific and Statistical Committee's (SSC) and the associated Monitoring Committee's and Advisory Panel's specification recommendations for 2012 and adopt 2012 commercial and recreational harvest levels and commercial management measures for the summer flounder, scup, black sea bass and bluefish fisheries. Research Set-Aside Priorities will be discussed for 2013. The Council will hold its regular Business Session to approve the June 2011 minutes and address any outstanding actions from the June 2011 meeting, receive Liaison Reports, receive an overview of Amendment 6 to the Monkfish FMP and Council recommendations to the Monkfish O/S Committee, Organizational Reports to include the SAW/SARC 52 report, the Executive Director's Report, the Science Report, Committee Reports, and any continuing and/or new business.

Special Accommodations

This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aid should be directed to M. Jan Saunders, (302) 526-5251, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION:

Notice; receipt of application for permit.

SUMMARY:

Notice is hereby given that David Honig, Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University Marine Laboratory, 135 Marine Lab Road, Beaufort, NC 28516, has applied in due form for a permit to collect, receive, import, export, possess, and conduct analyses marine mammal specimens for scientific research.

DATES:

Written, telefaxed, or e-mail comments must be received on or before August 29, 2011.

ADDRESSES:

The application and related documents are available for review by selecting “Records Open for Public Comment” from theFeaturesbox on the Applications and Permits for Protected Species home page,https://apps.nmfs.noaa.gov,and then selecting File No. 16433 from the list of available applications.

These documents are also available upon written request or by appointment in the following office(s):

Written comments on this application should be submitted to the Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division, at the address listed above. Comments may also be submitted by facsimile to (301) 713-0376, or by e-mail toNMFS.Pr1Comments@noaa.gov.Please include File No. 16433 in the subject line of the e-mail comment.

Those individuals requesting a public hearing should submit a written request to the Chief, Permits, Conservation and Education Division at the address listedabove. The request should set forth the specific reasons why a hearing on this application would be appropriate.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Laura Morse or Jennifer Skidmore, (301) 427-8401.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The subject permit is requested under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361et seq.), the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216), the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531et seq.), and the regulations governing the taking, importing, and exporting of endangered and threatened species (50 CFR 222-226).

The objectives of this research are to study the ecological importance of whales and characterize the impacts of whaling on animals nutritionally dependent on sunken whale remains in the Antarctic. Research will involve collection, import, export, possession, and analyses of bones of sperm (Physeter macrocephalus) and minke (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) whales which originated from Sweden and Chile. Collection would involve retrieval of a lander on which the whale bones have been placed on the bottom of the Weddell Sea, Antarctica by foreign researchers and under other authorizations. Bones would be imported into the U.S. for analyses. No live animals would be harassed or taken, lethally or otherwise, under the permit. The permit is requested for a five-year period.

In compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321et seq.), an initial determination has been made that the activity proposed is categorically excluded from the requirement to prepare an environmental assessment or environmental impact statement.

Concurrent with the publication of this notice in theFederal Register, NMFS is forwarding copies of this application to the Marine Mammal Commission and its Committee of Scientific Advisors.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will submit to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 35).

Agency:United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).

Title:Patent Examiner Employment Application.

Form Number(s):None.

Type of Request:Revision of a currently approved collection.

Burden:5,000 hours annually.

Number of Respondents:10,000 responses per year.

Avg. Hours per Response:The USPTO expects that it will take the public approximately 30 minutes (0.50 hours) to gather the necessary information, create the document, and submit the completed request, depending upon the type of request and the method of submission (electronic or paper).

Needs and Uses:The Patent Examiner Employment Application, as administered through Monster Hiring Management (MHM) provided by Monster Government Solutions, is used by the public to apply for entry-level patent examiner positions through a user-friendly process. The USPTO uses the electronic transmission of this information to review and rate applicants on-line almost instantaneously. It is also used by the USPTO to expedite the hiring process by eliminating the time used in the mail distribution process, thereby streamlining labor and reducing costs.

The information supplied to the USPTO by an applicant seeking a patent examiner position assists the Human Resources Specialists and hiring managers in determining whether or not an applicant possesses the basic qualifications for that position.

Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent on or before August 29, 2011 to Nicholas A. Fraser, OMB Desk Officer, via e-mail toNicholas_A._Fraser@omb.eop.gov,or by fax to 202-395-5167, marked to the attention of Nicholas A. Fraser.

The Corporation for National and Community Service (hereinafter the “Corporation”), has submitted a public information collection request (ICR) entitled Annual Grantee Progress Report to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13, (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). Copies of this ICR, with applicable supporting documentation, may be obtained by calling the Corporation for National and Community Service, Ms. Amy Borgstrom at (202) 606-6930. Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TTY-TDD) may call (202) 833-3722 between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. eastern time, Monday through Friday.

ADDRESSES:

Comments may be submitted, identified by the title of the information collection activity, to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attn: Ms. Sharon Mar, OMB Desk Officer for the Corporation for National and Community Service, by any of the following two methods within 30 days from the date of publication in thisFederal Register:

(1)By fax to:(202) 395-6974,Attention:Ms. Sharon Mar, OMB Desk Officer for the Corporation for National and Community Service; and

(2) Electronicallyby e-mail to:smar@omb.eop.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The OMB is particularly interested in comments which:

• Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Corporation, including whether the information will have practical utility;

• Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

• Propose ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

• Propose ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submissions of responses.

Comments:A 60-day public comment Notice was published in theFederal RegisteronMay 20, 2011. This comment period ended July 13, 2011. No public comments were received from this Notice.

Description:The Corporation seeks to renew the current information collection. The Corporation is seeking approval of the attached Annual Grantee Progress Report which will be used by grantees of the Corporation's AmeriCorps State and National in their annual reporting. The Annual Grantee Progress Report will provide information for Corporation staff to monitor grantee progress, and to respond to requests from Congress and other stakeholders. The information collection will otherwise be used in the same manner as the approved information collection. The Corporation also seeks to continue using the current application until the revised application is approved by OMB. The current application is due to expire on 7/31/2011.

On November 22, 2010 (75 FR 71081-71083), DoD published a notice announcing its intent to add a new Privacy Act System of Records. The incorrect system identification number was cited. This notice corrects that error.

On November 22, 2010, DoD published a notice announcing its intent to add a new system to its inventory of Privacy Act System of Records: Department of Defense Non-appropriated Fund Health Benefits (DoDNHB). Subsequent to the publication of that notice, DoD discovered that the system identification number on page 71082 was incorrectly published.

Correction

In the notice (FR Doc. 2010-29339) published on November 22, 2010 (75 FR 71081-71083) make the following correction. On page 71082, in the first column, in the line preceding theSYSTEM NAMEheading, the system identification number “A0215-3a FMWRC (DoD)” should read “A0215-1a FMWRC (DoD)”.

Dated: July 25, 2011.Aaron Siegel,Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.[FR Doc. 2011-19091 Filed 7-27-11; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 5001-06-PDEPARTMENT OF DEFENSEDepartment of the NavyMeeting of the Board of Advisors to the Presidents of the Naval Postgraduate School and the Naval War CollegeAGENCY:

Department of the Navy, DoD.

ACTION:

Notice of open meeting.

SUMMARY:

Pursuant to the provisions of The Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, as amended), notice is hereby given that the following meeting of the Board of Advisors (BOA) to the Presidents of the Naval Postgraduate School (NPS) and the Naval War College (NWC) and its subcommittees will be held. This meeting will be open to the public.

DATES:

The meeting will be held on Thursday, September 29, 2011, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. and on Friday, September 30, 2011, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. Eastern Time Zone.

ADDRESSES:

The meeting will be held at the Office of Naval Research, 875 N. Randolph Street, Arlington, VA.

The purpose of the meeting is to elicit the advice of the Board on the Naval Service's Postgraduate Education Program and the collaborative exchange and partnership between the NPS and the Air Force Institute of Technology. The board examines the effectiveness with which the NPS and the NWC are accomplishing its mission. The agenda is as follows:

(1) September 29, 2011: General deliberations and inquiry into the curricula; instruction; physical equipment; administration; state of morale of the student body, faculty, and staff; fiscal affairs; and any other matters relating to the operations of the Naval Postgraduate School as the board considers pertinent.

(2) September 30, 2011: General deliberations and inquiry into the curricula; instruction; physical equipment; administration; state of morale of the student body, faculty, and staff; fiscal affairs; and any other matters relating to the operations of the Naval War College as the board considers pertinent.

Individuals without a DoD Government Common Access Card require an escort at the meeting location. For access, information, or to send written comments regarding the NPS/NWC BOA contact Ms. Jaye Panza, Naval Postgraduate School, 1 University Circle, Monterey, CA 93943-5001 or by fax 831-656-3145 by September 15, 2011.

Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before August 29, 2011.

ADDRESSES:

Written comments should be addressed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Education Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW., Room 10222, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503, be faxed to (202) 395-5806 or e-mailed tooira_submission@omb.eop.govwith a cc: toICDocketMgr@ed.gov.Please note that written comments received in response to this notice will be considered public records.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. chapter 35) requires that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) provide interested Federal agencies and the public an early opportunity to comment on information collection requests. The OMB is particularly interested in comments which: (1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Abstract:This data collection will focus on gathering relevant information on the Technical Assistance and Dissemination (TA&D) Program from program grantees and from officials at State Education Agencies (SEAs) and Part C lead agencies. This data collection will include two activities. The first activity will be a TA&D Program Grantee Questionnaire/Interview, which will yield detailed descriptive information of TA&D Program grantees' activities concerning the topic areas addressed by TA&D Program grantees, the practices and outcomes in particular on which grantees are focused, as well as the technical assistance products and services provided by the TA&D Program grantees and to whom they provide them. The second activity will be a state survey, which will provide information concerning the needs that SEAs and Part C lead agencies have for technical assistance to support the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and support improvement of child outcomes, and the technical assistance services and products that have been accessed or received by selected staff at the state level from Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) TA&D Program centers and their satisfaction with those services and products.

The data from these two activities will address the following research questions:

1. What technical assistance do state agencies (i.e.,state educational agencies and Part C lead agencies) need to implement IDEA 2004 effectively andimprove outcomes for children with disabilities?

2. To what extent do state agencies receive TA, in areas of need, to implement IDEA 2004 effectively and improve outcomes for children with disabilities?

3. What are the topic areas addressed by TA&D grantees and on which outcomes in particular are grantees focused?

4. What technical assistance products and services do TA&D program grantees provide?

5. What technical assistance products and services do state agencies receive in order to help meet their needs to implement IDEA 2004 effectively and improve outcomes for children with disabilities?

6. For focal topic areas, to what extent are state agencies satisfied with the products and services received from TA&D grantees?

This data collection will provide unique, detailed data and information that are not currently available from other sources but that are necessary in order to accurately understand the role that the TA&D Program plays in supporting state agencies in their implementation of IDEA. The National Evaluation of the TA&D Program is part of the National Assessment of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (hereafter referred to as the National Assessment). Failure to collect these data may result in the Department of Education being unable to adequately report to Congress on the National Assessment.

Copies of the information collection submission for OMB review may be accessed from the RegInfo.gov Web site athttp://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMainor from the Department's Web site athttp://edicsweb.ed.gov,by selecting the “Browse Pending Collections” link and by clicking on link number 4615. When you access the information collection, click on “Download Attachments ” to view. Written requests for information should be addressed to U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., LBJ, Washington, DC 20202-4537. Requests may also be electronically mailed to the Internet addressICDocketMgr@ed.govor faxed to 202-401-0920. Please specify the complete title of the information collection and OMB Control Number when making your request.

Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339.

Advisory Commission on Accessible Instructional Materials in Postsecondary Education for Students with Disabilities, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, U.S. Department of Education.

ACTION:

Notice of an open meeting via conference call.

SUMMARY:

The notice sets forth the schedule and agenda of the meeting of the Advisory Commission on Accessible Instructional Materials in Postsecondary Education for Students with Disabilities. The notice also describes the functions of the Commission. Notice of the meeting is required by section 10 (a) (2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act and is intended to notify the public of its opportunity to attend.

DATES:

August 12, 2011.

Time:11 a.m.-5 p.m., Eastern Standard Time.

ADDRESSES:

The Commission will meet via conference call on August 12, 2011. Members of the public have the option of participating in the open meeting remotely. Remote access will be provided via an internet webinar service utilizing VoiP (Voice Over Internet Protocol). The login address for members of the public ishttps://aimpsc.ilinc.com/join/bbxmffc.This login information is also provided via the Commission's public listserv atpscpublic@lists.cast.organd posted at the following site:http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/aim/index.html.

The Advisory Commission on Accessible Instructional Materials in Postsecondary Education for Students with Disabilities (the Commission) is established under Section 772 of the Higher Education Opportunity Act, Public Law 110-315, dated August 14, 2008. The Commission is established to (a) conduct a comprehensive study, which will—(I) assess the barriers and systemic issues that may affect, and technical solutions available that may improve, the timely delivery and quality of accessible instructional materials for postsecondary students with print disabilities, as well as the effective use of such materials by faculty and staff; and (II) make recommendations related to the development of a comprehensive approach to improve the opportunities for postsecondary students with print disabilities to access instructional materials in specialized formats in a time frame comparable to the availability of instructional materials for postsecondary nondisabled students.

In making recommendations for the study, the Commission shall consider—(I) how students with print disabilities may obtain instructional materials in accessible formats within a time frame comparable to the availability of instructional materials for nondisabled students; and to the maximum extent practicable, at costs comparable to the costs of such materials for nondisabled students; (II) the feasibility and technical parameters of establishing standardized electronic file formats, such as the National Instructional Materials Accessibility Standard as defined in Section 674(e)(3) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, to be provided by publishers of instructional materials to producers of materials in specialized formats, institutions of higher education, and eligible students; (III) the feasibility of establishing a national clearinghouse, repository, or file-sharing network for electronic files in specialized formats and files used in producing instructional materials in specialized formats, and a list of possible entities qualified to administer such clearinghouse, repository, or network; (IV) the feasibility of establishing market-based solutions involving collaborations among publishers of instructional materials, producers of materials in specialized formats, and institutions of higher education; (V) solutions utilizing universal design; and (VI) solutions for low-incidence, high-cost requests for instructional materials in specialized formats.

During the meeting, the Commission will discuss the first draft of the final report. Given the limited meeting time, the Commission does not anticipate that there will be an opportunity for public comment during the teleconference meeting. Members of the public are encouraged to submit written comments to the AIM Commission website ataimcommission@ed.gov,and the Commission will respond to the comments if possible. Members of thepublic who would like to offer comments as part of the meeting may submit written comments toAIMCommission@ed.govor by mail to Advisory Commission on Accessible Instructional Materials in Postsecondary Education for Students with Disabilities, 550 12th St., SW., Room PCP-5113, Washington, DC 20202.

All submissions will become part of the public record. Members of the public may also join the Commission's list serv atPSCpublic@lists.cast.org.

Detailed minutes of the meeting, including summaries of the activities of the closed sessions and related matters that are informative to the public and consistent with the policy of section 5 U.S.C. 552b(c) will be available to the public. Records are kept of all Commission proceedings and are available for public inspection at the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, United States Department of Education, 550 12th Street, SW., Washington, DC 20202, Monday-Friday during the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

Additional Information

Individuals who will need accommodations for a disability in order to listen to the meeting (e.g.,interpreting services, assistive listening devices, or material in alternative format) should notify Elizabeth Shook at (202) 245-7642, no later than August 5, 2011. We will make every attempt to meet requests for accommodations after this date, but, cannot guarantee their availability. The conference call will be accessible to individuals with disabilities.

Electronic Access to this Document:You may view this document, as well as all other documents of this Department published in theFederal Register,in text or Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) on the internet at the following site:http://www.ed.gov/news/fedregister/index.html.To use PDF you must have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available free at this site. If you have questions about using PDF, call the U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO), toll free at 1-866-512-1800; or in the Washington, DC area at 202-512-0000.

In compliance with the requirements of section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) has submitted the information collection described below to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review of this information collection requirement. Any interested person may file comments directly with OMB and should address a copy of those comments to the Commission as explained below. The Commission received no comments in response to an earlierFederal Registernotice of May 13, 2011 (76 FR 28014) and has made this notation in its submission to OMB.

DATES:

Comments on the collection of information are due by August 29, 2011.

ADDRESSES:

Address comments on the collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Desk Officer. Comments to OMB should be filed electronically, c/ooira_submission@omb.eop.govand include OMB Control Number 1902-0180 for reference. The Desk Officer may be reached by telephone at 202-395-4638.

A copy of the comments should also be sent to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and should refer to Docket No. IC11-600-001. Comments may be filed either electronically or in paper format. Those persons filing electronically do not need to make a paper filing. Documents filed electronically via the Internet must be prepared in an acceptable filing format and in compliance with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission submission guidelines. Complete filing instructions and acceptable filing formats are available athttp://www.ferc.gov/help/submission-guide.asp.To file the document electronically, access the Commission's website and click on Documents & Filing, E-Filing (http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp), and then follow the instructions for each screen. First time users will have to establish a user name and password. The Commission will send an automatic acknowledgement to the sender's e-mail address upon receipt of comments.

For paper filings, comments should be submitted to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, and should refer to Docket No. IC11-600-001.

Users interested in receiving automatic notification of activity in FERC Docket Number IC11-600 may do so through eSubscription athttp://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp.All comments may be viewed, printed or downloaded remotely via the Internet through FERC's homepage using the “eLibrary” link. For user assistance, contactferconlinesupport@ferc.govor toll-free at (866) 208-3676, or for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ellen Brown may be reached by e-mail atDataClearance@FERC.gov,by telephone at (202) 502-8663, and by fax at (202) 273-0873.

With respect to the natural gas industry, section 14(a) of the NGA provides: The Commission may permit any person to file with it a statement in writing, under oath or otherwise, as it shall determine, as to any or all facts and circumstances concerning a matter which may be the subject of an investigation.

For public utilities, section 205(e) of the FPA provides: Whenever any such new schedule is filed, the Commission shall have the authority, either upon complaint or upon its own initiative without complaint at once, and, if it so orders, without answer or formal pleading by the public utility, but upon reasonable notice to enter upon hearing concerning the lawfulness of such rate, charge, classification, or service; andpending such hearing and decision of the Commission.

Section 215(d)(5) of the FPA provides: The Commission, upon its own motion or upon complaint, may order the Electric Reliability Organization to submit to the Commission a proposed reliability standard or a modification to a reliability standard that addresses a specific matter if the Commission considers such a new or modified reliability standard appropriate to carry out this section.

Concerning hydropower projects, section 19 of the FPA provides: * * * it is agreed as a condition of such license that jurisdiction is hereby conferred upon the Commission, upon complaint of any person aggrieved or upon its own initiative, to exercise such regulation and control until such time as the State shall have provided a commission or other authority for such regulation and control.

For qualifying facilities, section 210(h)(2)(B) of PURPA provides: Any electric utility, qualifying co-generator, or qualifying small power producer may petition the Commission to enforce the requirements of subsection (f) as provided in subparagraph (A) of this paragraph.

Likewise for oil pipelines, Part 1 of the Interstate Commerce Act (ICA), sections 1, 6 and 15 (re-codified by Pub. L. 95-473 and found as an appendix to Title 49 U.S.C.) the Commission is authorized to investigate the rates charged by oil pipeline companies subject to its jurisdiction. If a proposed oil rate has been filed and allowed by the Commission to go into effect without suspension and hearing, the Commission can investigate the effective rate on its own motion or by complaint filed with the Commission. Section 13 of the ICA provided that: Any person, firm, corporation, company or association, or any mercantile, agricultural, or manufacturing society or other organization, or any common carrier subject to the provisions of this chapter in contravention of the provisions thereof, may apply to the Commission by petition which shall briefly state the facts: whereupon a statement of the complaint thus made shall be forwarded by the Commission to such common carrier, who shall be called upon to satisfy the complaint, or to answer the same in writing, with in a reasonable time, to be specified by the Commission. * * *

In Order No. 602, 64 FR 17087 (April 8, 1999), the Commission revised its regulations governing complaints filed with the Commission under the above statutes. Order No. 602 was designed to encourage and support consensual resolution of complaints, and to organize the complaint procedures so that all complaints are handled in a timely and fair manner. In order to achieve the latter, the Commission revised Rule 206 of its Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.206) to require that a complaint satisfy certain informational requirements, that answers be filed in a shorter, 20-day time frame, and that parties may employ various types of alternative dispute resolution procedures to resolve complaints.

In Order No. 647, 69FR 32436 (June 10, 2004), the Commission revised its regulations to simplify the formats it requires for various types of notices. These revisions provide for a more uniform formatting and make it easier for the Commission to update the form of notice formatting without the necessity of initiating a rulemaking for every change. A new subsection 18 CFR 385.203(d) replaced the former format requirements. Among the provisions that were affected by these revisions was 18 CFR 385.206(b) (10).

On October 30, 2008, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved the reporting requirements contained in FERC-600 for a term of three years, the maximum period permissible under the Paperwork Reduction Act1before an information collection must be resubmitted for approval. As noted above this notice seeks public comments in order for the Commission to submit a justification to OMB to approve and extend the current expiration date of the FERC-600 reporting requirements. The data in complaints filed by interested/affected parties regarding oil and natural gas pipeline operations, electric and hydropower facilities in their applications for rate changes, service, licensing or reliability are used by the Commission in establishing a basis for various investigations and to make an initial determination regarding the merits of the complaint.

Investigations may range from whether there is undue discrimination in rates or service to questions regarding market power of regulated entities to environmental concerns. In order to make a better determination, it is important to know the specifics of any oil, gas, electric, and hydropower complaint “upfront” in a timely manner and in sufficient detail to allow the Commission to act swiftly. In addition, such complaint data will help the Commission and interested parties to monitor the market for exercises of market power or undue discrimination. The information is voluntary but submitted with prescribed filing requirements. The Commission implements these filing requirements in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) under 18 CFR parts 343, and 385, 385.206, 385.203 and 385.213.

Action:The Commission is requesting a three-year extension of the current expiration date, with no changes to the existing collection of data.

Burden Statement:Public reporting burden for this collection is estimated as:

Data collectionNumber of

respondents2

Average

Number of

responses per

respondent

Average

Number of

burden hours

per response

Total annual hours(1)(2)(3)(1) × (2) × (3)FERC-600881141,232

Estimatedcost burden to respondents is $84,328. (1,232 hours/2080 hours per year times $142,372 per year average per employee = $84,328). The cost per respondent is $958. There is a slight increase in the average number of respondents and number of filings since the last renewal request (in 2008, the average number of respondents was 81).The cost per respondent has increased to reflect adjustments due to inflationary costs.

2This is a three year average of the number of respondents (2008-2010).

The reporting burden includes the total time, effort, or financial resources expended to generate, maintain, retain, disclose, or provide the information including: (1) Reviewing instructions; (2) developing, acquiring, installing, and utilizing technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, verifying, processing, maintaining, disclosing and providing information; (3) adjusting the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; (4) training personnel to respond to a collection of information; (5) searching data sources; (6) completing and reviewing the collection of information; and (7) transmitting or otherwise disclosing the information.

The estimate of cost for respondents is based upon salaries for professional and clerical support, as well as direct and indirect overhead costs. Direct costs include all costs directly attributable to providing this information, such as administrative costs and the cost for information technology. Indirect or overhead costs are costs incurred by an organization in support of its mission. These costs apply to activities which benefit the whole organization rather than any one particular function or activity.

Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Commission, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms of information technology e.g. permitting electronic submission of responses.

All documents may be filed electronically via the Internet. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site athttp://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.If unable to be filed electronically, documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an original and seven copies should be mailed to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system athttp://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp.You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. Please include the project number (P-487-082) on any comments, motions, or recommendations filed.

k.Description of Request:PPL Holtwood, LLC, requests Commission authorization to permit White Sands Springs to install four new docks, accommodating 128 slips, to its existing single dock, 12 slip, residential community marina. The additional slips would serve the residents of the White Sands Springs Community. No dredging activities, shoreline stabilization, or fueling facilities are associated with the proposal.

l. Locations of the Application:A copy of the application is available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, or by calling (202) 502-8371. This filing may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site athttp://www.ferc.govusing the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. You may also register online athttp://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.aspto be notified via e-mail of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or e-mailFERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,for TTY, call (202) 502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item (h) above.

m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.

n.Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene:Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.

o.Filing and Service of Responsive Documents:Any filing must (1) Bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “PROTEST”, or “MOTION TO INTERVENE” as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the name of the applicant and the project number of the application to which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 4.34(b).Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular application. If an intervener files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of all other filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and 385.2010.

Take notice that on July 8, 2011, National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation (National Fuel), 6363 Main Street, Williamsville, New York 14221, filed in Docket No. CP11-512-000 an application, pursuant to sections 7(b) and 7(c) of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and part 157 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's Regulations, to construct and operate its Line N 2012 Expansion Project, all as more fully set forth in the application which is on file with the Commission and open for public inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the Web athttp://www.ferc.govusing the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC atFERCOnlineSupport@ferc.govor call toll-free, (866) 208-3676 or TTY, (202) 502-8659.

Specifically, National Fuel requests authorization to: (1) Install approximately 4.85 miles of 24-inch pipeline; (2) install two 10,310 horsepower compressors at the Buffalo Compressor Station; (3) install four new road crossings; and (4) convert approximately 4.85 miles of existing Line N and the four existing road crossings in Washington County, Pennsylvania to inactive status for possible future use. National Fuel states that the project will create an additional 150,000 Dth per day of firm capacity. The estimated total cost of the Line N 2012 Expansion Project is $35,823,805.

Any questions regarding this application should be directed to Antoinetta Mucilli, Senior Attorney for National Fuel, 6363 Main Street, Williamsville, New York 14221, or call at (716) 857-7067.

Pursuant to section 157.9 of the Commission's rules, 18 CFR 157.9, within 90 days of this Notice, the Commission staff will either: Complete its environmental assessment (EA) and place it into the Commission's public record (eLibrary) for this proceeding; or issue a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review. If a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review is issued, it will indicate, among other milestones, the anticipated date for the Commission staff's issuance of the final environmental impact statement (FEIS) or EA for this proposal. The filing of the EA in the Commission's public record for this proceeding or the issuance of a Notice of Schedule for Environmental Review will serve to notify Federal and state agencies of the timing for the completion of all necessary reviews, and the subsequent need to complete all federal authorizations within 90 days of the date of issuance of the Commission staff's FEIS or EA.

There are two ways to become involved in the Commission's review of this project. First, any person wishing to obtain legal status by becoming a party to the proceedings for this project should, on or before the comment date stated below, file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 385.211) and the Regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.10). A person obtaining party status will be placed on the service list maintained by the Secretary of the Commission and will receive copies of all documents filed by the applicant and by all other parties. A party must submit 7 copies of filings made with the Commission and must mail a copy to the applicant and to every other party in the proceeding. Only parties to the proceeding can ask for court review of Commission orders in the proceeding.

However, a person does not have to intervene in order to have comments considered. The second way to participate is by filing with the Secretary of the Commission, as soon as possible, an original and two copies of comments in support of or in opposition to this project. The Commission will consider these comments in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but the filing of a comment alone will not serve to make the filer a party to the proceeding. The Commission's rules require that persons filing comments in opposition to the project provide copies of their protests only to the party or parties directly involved in the protest.

Persons who wish to comment only on the environmental review of this project should submit an original and two copies of their comments to the Secretary of the Commission. Environmental commentors will be placed on the Commission's environmental mailing list, will receive copies of the environmental documents, and will be notified of meetings associated with the Commission's environmental review process. Environmental commentors will not be required to serve copies of filed documents on all other parties. However, the non-party commentors will not receive copies of all documents filed by other parties or issued by the Commission (except for the mailing of environmental documents issued by the Commission) and will not have the right to seek court review of the Commission's final order.

The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link athttp://www.ferc.gov.Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.

This filing is accessible on-line athttp://www.ferc.gov,using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mailFERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

i.FERC Contact:Any questions on this notice should be addressed to Vedula Sarma at (202) 502-6190 orvedula.sarma@ferc.gov.

j.Deadline for filing comments and or motions:August 21, 2011.

Comments, protests, and interventions may be filed electronically via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site (http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp). Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system (http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp) and must include name and contact information at the end of comments. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings.

All documents (original and seven copies) filed by paper should be sent to: Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Please include the project number (P-2629-010) on any comments or motions filed.

The Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure require all interveners filing documents with the Commission to serve a copy of that document on each person whose name appears on the official service list for the project. Further, if an intervener files comments or documents with the Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of any motion to intervene must also be served upon each representative of the Applicant specified in the particular application.

k.Description of Application:The licensee proposes to replace an existing 4-foot high by 216-foot long wooden flashboard on one of the Morrisville dam spillways with two sections of 4-foot high by 108-foot long automatic crest control system. There would be no change in the authorized normal maximum water surface elevation of 631.79 feet NGVD datum.

l.Locations of the Application:A copy of the application is available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public Reference Room, located at 888 First Street, NE., Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, or by calling (202) 502-8371. This filing may also be viewed on the Commission's Web site using the “eLibrary” link athttp://elibrary.ferc.gov/idmws/search/fercgensearch.asp.Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits (P-2629) in the docket number field to access the document. You may also register online athttp://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.aspto be notified via e-mail of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or e-mailFERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,for TTY, call (202) 502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item (h) above.

m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.

n.Comments, Protests, or Motions To Intervene:Anyone may submit comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211, .214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified comment date for the particular application.

o. Any filings must bear in all capital letters the title “COMMENTS”, “PROTEST”, or “MOTION TO INTERVENE”, as applicable, and the Project Number of the particular application to which the filing refers.

p.Agency Comments:Federal, state, and local agencies are invited to file comments on the described application. A copy of the application may be obtained by agencies directly from the Applicant. If an agency does not file comments within the time specified for filing comments, it will be presumed to have no comments. One copy of an agency's comments must also be sent to the Applicant's representatives.

Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding, interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.

As it relates to any qualifying facility filings, the notices of self-certification [or self-recertification] listed above, do not institute a proceeding regarding qualifying facility status. A notice of self-certification [or self-recertification] simply provides notification that the entity making the filing has determined the facility named in the notice meets the applicable criteria to be a qualifying facility. Intervention and/or protest do not lie in dockets that are qualifying facility self-certifications or self-recertifications. Any person seeking to challenge such qualifying facility status may do so by filing a motion pursuant to 18 CFR 292.207(d)(iii). Intervention and protests may be filed in response to notices of qualifying facility dockets other than self-certifications and self-recertifications.

The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links athttp://www.ferc.gov.To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.

The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mailFERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov.or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Description:Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporationsubmits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: 2011-7-19_NSP-SMMPA_Letter Agrm_312-NSP to be effective 12/31/2010.

Filed Date:07/19/2011.

Accession Number:20110719-5072.

Comment Date:5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, August 09, 2011.

Docket Numbers:ER11-4077-000.

Applicants:Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation.

Description:Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: 2011-7-19_CAPX_FARGO_R-R_Phase-1_CMA_Agmt to be effective 8/18/2010.

Filed Date:07/19/2011.

Accession Number:20110719-5161.

Comment Date:5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, August 09, 2011.

Take notice that the Commission received the following land acquisition reports:

Docket Numbers:LA11-2-000.

Applicants:Alabama Power Company, Georgia Power Company, Gulf Power Company, Mississippi Power Company, Southern Power Company.

Description:Report of the acquisition and/or demonstration of control of sites for new generation development of Southern Company Services, Inc. on behalf of Alabama Power Companyet al.

Filed Date:07/19/2011.

Accession Number:20110719-5059.

Comment Date:5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, August 09, 2011.

Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding, interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.

As it relates to any qualifying facility filings, the notices of self-certification [or self-recertification] listed above, do not institute a proceeding regarding qualifying facility status. A notice of self-certification [or self-recertification] simply provides notification that the entity making the filing has determined the facility named in the notice meets the applicable criteria to be a qualifying facility. Intervention and/or protest do not lie in dockets that are qualifying facility self-certifications or self-recertifications. Any person seeking to challenge such qualifying facility status may do so by filing a motion pursuant to 18 CFR 292.207(d)(iii). Intervention and protests may be filed in response to notices of qualifying facility dockets other than self-certifications and self-recertifications.

The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links athttp://www.ferc.gov.To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.

The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mailFERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov.or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding, interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.

The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links athttp://www.ferc.gov.To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.

The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mailFERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Description:Pacific Gas and Electric Company submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: City of Ukiah WPA and NCPA IA to be effective 7/22/2011.

Filed Date:07/21/2011.

Accession Number:20110721-5127.

Comment Date:5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 11, 2011.

Docket Numbers:ER11-4091-000.

Applicants:Arizona Public Service Company.

Description:Arizona Public Service Company submits tariff filing per 35.13(a)(2)(iii: New, Amended, and Cancelled Exhibit B's in APS Rate Schedule No. 217 to be effective 9/19/2011.

Filed Date:07/21/2011.

Accession Number:20110721-5140.

Comment Date:5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, August 11, 2011.

Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding, interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.

As it relates to any qualifying facility filings, the notices of self-certification [or self-recertification] listed above, do not institute a proceeding regarding qualifying facility status. A notice of self-certification [or self-recertification] simply provides notification that the entity making the filing has determined the facility named in the notice meets the applicable criteria to be a qualifying facility. Intervention and/or protest do not lie in dockets that are qualifying facility self-certifications or self-recertifications. Any person seeking to challenge such qualifying facility status may do so by filing a motion pursuant to 18 CFR 292.207(d)(iii). Intervention and protests may be filed in response to notices of qualifying facility dockets other than self-certifications and self-recertifications.

The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links athttp://www.ferc.gov.To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.

The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mailFERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov.or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding, interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.

As it relates to any qualifying facility filings, the notices of self-certification [or self-recertification] listed above, do not institute a proceeding regarding qualifying facility status. A notice of self-certification [or self-recertification] simply provides notification that the entity making the filing has determined the facility named in the notice meets the applicable criteria to be a qualifying facility. Intervention and/or protest do not lie in dockets that are qualifying facility self-certifications or self-recertifications. Any person seeking to challenge such qualifying facility status may do so by filing a motion pursuant to 18 CFR 292.207(d)(iii). Intervention and protests may be filed in response to notices of qualifying facility dockets other than self-certifications and self-recertifications.

The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links athttp://www.ferc.gov.To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.

The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mailFERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov.or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Tesoro alleges that because SFPP has over-recovered its cost of service in 2010, and their proposed index-based rate increases exceed the actual decrease in the pipeline's previous-year costs in such a manner that substantially exacerbate that over-recovery, SFPP is not entitled to raise its rates. Tesoro requests that the Commission determine that the rates established by SFPP, L.P.in FERC Tariff Nos. 194.1.0, 195.1.0, 196.3.0, 197.1.0, 198.3.0, 199.1.0, and 200.1.0 are unjust and unreasonable; prescribe new just and reasonable for the SFPP interstate pipeline system; and order SFPP to pay refunds, plus interest, to Tesoro for shipments made by Tesoro under each of the tariffs specified above from July 1, 2011 through the date on which the Commission resolves the issues presented in this docket and related proceedings. Tesoro has also requested that the Commission grant such other, different or additional relief as it may determine to be appropriate.

Tesoro certifies that copies of the complaint were served on the contacts for SFPP as listed on the Commission's list of Corporate Officials.

Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and protests must be served on the Complainants.

The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link athttp://www.ferc.gov.Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.

This filing is accessible on-line athttp://www.ferc.gov,using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mailFERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company (Complainant) filed a formal complaint against SFPP L.P. (SFPP or Respondent) alleging that SFPP has substantially over-recovered its cost of service for 2010. The Complainant states that the Respondent's rates contained in Tariff Nos. 194.0.0, 195.0.0, 196.2.0, 197.0.0, 198.2.0, 199.0.0, and 200.0.0 are unjust and unreasonable and request that the Commission prescribe new rates for the shipment of refined petroleum products on its interstate pipeline. The Complainant seeks repayment, reparations and damages plus interest from the Respondent from July 1, 2010 through the date of the Commission's resolution of this issue.

The Complainant certifies that copies of the complaint were served on the contacts for SFPP as listed on the Commission's list of Corporate Officials.

Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and protests must be served on the Complainants.

The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link athttp://www.ferc.gov.Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.

This filing is accessible on-line athttp://www.ferc.gov,using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mailFERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Comment Date:5 p.m. Eastern Time on August 9, 2011.

Dated: July 20, 2011.Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,Deputy Secretary.[FR Doc. 2011-19076 Filed 7-27-11; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6717-01-PDEPARTMENT OF ENERGYFederal Energy Regulatory Commission[Docket No. EL00-66-012]Louisiana Public Service Commission; The Council of the City of New Orleans v. Entergy Corporation; Notice of Filing

Take notice that on July 20, 2011, Entergy Services, Inc., acting as agent for Entergy Operating Companies, filed an amended/corrected report of refunds in compliance with the Commission's June 9, 2011 Order,Louisiana Public Service Commission and the Council of the City of New Orleansv.Entergy Corporation,135 FERC ¶ 61,218 (2011).

Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this proceeding.

The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link athttp://www.ferc.gov.Persons unable to file electronicallyshould submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.

This filing is accessible on-line athttp://www.ferc.gov,using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mailFERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of CSOLAR IV South, LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.

Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant.

Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of liability, is August 3, 2011.

The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links athttp://www.ferc.gov.To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.

The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mailFERCOnlineSupport@ferc.govor call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

On June 13, 2011, the Commission issued an order in this proceeding establishing a staff technical conference.1This notice establishes the agenda and topics for discussion at the technical conference, which will be held on July 28, 2011 from 9 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. (EDT) in the Commission Meeting Room at the Commission's headquarters, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC. Commission staff will lead the technical conference, and representatives from the following entities will participate as panelists: American Public Power Association, Dominion Resources Services, Inc., Maryland Public Service Commission, Monitoring Analytics, L.L.C., National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, New Jersey Board of Public Utilities, PJM Interconnection, L.L.C., PJM Load Group, PJM Power Providers Group, and PSEG Companies. All interested parties are invited to attend, and registration is not required.

1PJM Interconnection, L.L.C.,135 FERC ¶ 61,228 (2011).

The issues and questions to be discussed during this conference are attached. The purpose of the technical conference is to provide Commission staff and interested parties an opportunity to explore the applicability of PJM's Minimum Offer Price Rule (MOPR) to resources designated as “self supply.”

A free webcast of this event is available throughhttp://www.ferc.gov.Anyone with Internet access who desires to view this event can do so by navigating to the Calendar of Events onhttp://www.ferc.govand locating this event in the calendar. The event will contain a link to its webcast. The Capitol Connection provides technical support for the free webcasts. It also offers access to this event via television in the DC area and via phone bridge for a fee. If you have any questions, visithttp://www.CapitolConnection.orgor call (703) 993-3100.

Commission conferences are accessible under section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please send an e-mail toaccessibility@ferc.govor call toll free 1-866-208-3372 (voice) or 202-208-8659 (TTY), or send a fax to 202-208-2106 with the required accommodations.

For more information on this conference, please contact Jonathan Fernandez atjonathan.fernandez@ferc.govor (202) 502-6604.

1. Explain your understanding of how new resources designated as “self supply” would commit, clear, and be compensated in PJM's base residual auction prior to the April 12, 2011 Order.

2. Explain the conditions under which exempting new self-supply resources from PJM's MOPR wouldnotpresent the opportunity to exercise buyer market power.

3. Explain how the Commission's April 12 Order may impact long-term resource planning.

10:30 a.m.-10:45 a.m.—Break10:45 a.m.-12:30 p.m.

4. Does the same incentive to exercise buyer market power exist for buyers who largely or totally self-supply as compared to buyers who self-supply only a small portion of their load?

5. Does the same incentive to exercise buyer market power exist for small load serving entities as compared to large load serving entities?

6. Would the market power concern about using self-supply be alleviated if the self-supplied resources are acquired through a procurement process that does not discriminate between new and existing resources? If yes, what factors should be analyzed to determine whether a procurement process is non-discriminatory?

7. Explain why the Fixed Resource Requirement (FRR) Alternative is or is not a viable alternative for those wishing to self-supply.

8. What other alternatives to the FRR option would allow parties to self-supply while deterring buyer market power?

On August 5, 2011, Office of Energy Projects staff may participate in a public meeting hosted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Baltimore District (Corps) for the proposed Jennings Randolph Project No. 12715-003 (project). The purpose of the meeting is to discuss potential dam safety issues identified by the Maryland Department of the Environment related to the Corps' dam and any related effects on the project's licensing proceeding.

On June 21, 2011, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) announced that a staff Technical Conference on Performance Measurement of Demand Response in the PJM Capacity Market will be held on July 29, 2011, beginning at 9 a.m. (EDT) in the Commission Meeting Room at the Commission's headquarters, located at 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. The technical conference will be led by Commission staff, and Commissioners may be in attendance. The conference will be open for the public to attend and advance registration is not required.

Attached to this supplemental notice is an agenda for the conference. If any changes are made, the revised agenda will be posted prior to the event on the Calendar of Events on the Commission's Web site,http://www.ferc.gov.

The conference will be transcribed. Transcripts will be available immediately for a fee from Ace Reporting Company (202-347-3700 or 1-800-336-6646). A free webcast of this event is also available throughhttp://www.ferc.gov.Anyone with Internet access who desires to view this event can do so by navigating tohttp://www.ferc.gov's Calendar of Events and locating this event in the calendar. The event will contain a link to its webcast. The Capitol Connection provides technical support for the free webcasts. If you have any questions, visithttp://www.CapitolConnection.orgor call (703) 993-3100.

FERC conferences are accessible under section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. For accessibility accommodations please send an e-mail toaccessibility@ferc.govor call toll free (866) 208-3372 (voice) or (202) 502-8659 (TTY), or send a fax to (202) 208-2106 with the required accommodations.

1. Whether the customer baseline load (CBL) or peak load contribution (PLC) is a more accurate capacity market performance measure of what a demand response customer would have consumed in the absence of an instruction to reduce load.

2. Whether the current PJM add-back process under the guaranteed load drop (GLD) option, which is used to calculate peak load for capacity for the following delivery year, accurately reflects the fact that the load reduction of an over-performing demand response customer (i.e.a customer that provides a level of response greater than the MW nominated for it in the capacity auction) has been used to support an under-performing customer (i.e.a customer that provides a level of response less than the nominated MW) in a portfolio aggregated to meet the capacity commitment.

3. Whether PJM dispatchers account for PLCs during an emergency.

4. Whether any load in PJM can be at load levels in excess of PLC during an emergency.

5. Discuss the capacity obligations of end-use customers whose demand response resources have been committed in a prior RPM auction.

6. Whether a demand response resource should be obligated to reduce below its PLC during an emergency event, even if the magnitude of supply that the resource is providing is otherwise equivalent to its capacity commitment.

7. Whether the PLC limit on nominations in the capacity auction should serve as a basis for requiring load reductions of capacity resources to be below PLC.

Panelists

Chris Norton, Director of Regulatory Affairs, American Municipal Power Inc.

8. Whether the same MW reduction that is voluntarily made by a peak shaving customer in order to reduce capacity costs should also be eligible to receive incentives from PJM's Load Management programs.

9. Whether the current GLD option provides an incentive for aggregators to offset under-performing resources with resources that over-perform.

Panelists

Chris Norton, Director of Regulatory Affairs, American Municipal Power Inc.

Take notice that on July 15, 2011, pursuant to 18 CFR 35.28(e)(2) and 358.1(d) and Rules 101(e) and 207 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, Elk River Municipal Utilities (Elk River) filed a petition for waiver of any reciprocity-based standards of conduct or open access same-time information system (OASIS) requirements that may apply under Order Nos. 888, 889, 890, 2003, 2004, and 717.

Elk River states that it is not a FERC-jurisdictional “public utility” and consequently is not directly subject to the Commission's standards of conduct.

Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding, interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.

The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links athttp://www.ferc.gov.To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests.

Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.

The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mailFERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

On March 25, 2011, Reliable Storage 1 LLC, filed an application, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act, proposing to study the feasibility of hydropower near the town of Tazewell, in Claiborne County, Tennessee. The sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit holder priority to file a license application during the permit term. A preliminary permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any land-disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by others without the owners' express permission.

The proposed pumped storage project would consist of the following: (1) A 10-foot-high, 8,200-foot-long roller compacted concrete ringed dike; (2) an upper reservoir with a surface area of 59.7 acres and an 4,017 acre-foot storage capacity; (3) a 200-foot-high, 702.7-foot-long earth embankment dam creating; (4) a lower reservoir with a surface area of 66.5 acres and an 5,785 acre-foot storage capacity; (5) one 24-foot-diameter, 5,300-foot-long penstock; (6) a bifurcation to three 14-foot-diameter, and 50-foot-long penstocks; (7) a powerhouse/pumping station containing three pump/generating units with a total generating capacity of 331 megawatts; (8) a substation; and (9) a 2.86-mile-long, 115 kV transmission line to an existing distribution line. The proposed project would have an average annual generation of 517,000,000 megawatt-hours (MWh), which would be sold to the Tennessee Valley Authority.

Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file competing applications:60 days from the issuance of this notice. Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing applications may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web sitehttp://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system athttp://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp.You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support atFERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov;call toll-free at (866) 208-3676; or, for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659. Although the Commission strongly encourages electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file, mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.

More information about this project, including a copy of the application, can be viewed or printed on the “eLibrary” link of the Commission's Web site athttp://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.Enter the docket number (P-14124-000) in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

On March 25, 2011, Reliable Storage 1 LLC, filed an application, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act, proposing to study the feasibility of hydropower near the town of Luttrell, in Union and Grainger Counties, Tennessee. The sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit holder priority to file a license application during the permit term. A preliminary permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any land-disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by others without the owners' express permission.

The proposed pumped storage project would consist of the following: (1) A 10-foot-high, 11,600-foot-long roller compacted concrete ringed dike; (2) an upper reservoir with a surface area of 57.4 acres and an 4,563 acre-foot storage capacity; (3) a 110-foot-high, 7,977.7-foot-long earth embankment dam creating; (4) a lower reservoir with a surface area of 68.9 acres and a 3,196 acre-foot storage capacity; (5) one 24-foot-diameter, 4,050-foot-long penstock; (6) a bifurcation to three 16-foot-diameter, and 50-foot-long penstocks; (7) a powerhouse/pumping station containing three pump/generating units with a total generating capacity of 320 megawatts; (8) a substation; (9) a 1.1-mile-long, 500 kV transmission line to an existing distribution line; and (10) a new 1,300-foot-long access road. The proposed project would have an average annual generation of 500,000,000 megawatt-hours (MWh), which would be sold to the Tennessee Valley Authority.

Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file competing applications:60 days from the issuance of this notice. Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing applications may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web sitehttp://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system athttp://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp.You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support atFERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov;call toll-free at (866) 208-3676; or, for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659. Although the Commission strongly encourages electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file, mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.

More information about this project, including a copy of the application, can be viewed or printed on the “eLibrary”link of the Commission's Web site athttp://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.Enter the docket number (P-14121-000) in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

On March 25, 2011, Reliable Storage 1 LLC, filed an application, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act, proposing to study the feasibility of hydropower near the town of Tazewell, in Claiborne County, Tennessee. The sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit holder priority to file a license application during the permit term. A preliminary permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any land-disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by others without the owners' express permission.

The proposed pumped storage project would consist of the following: (1) A 10-foot-high, 6,700-foot-long roller compacted concrete ringed dike; (2) an upper reservoir with a surface area of 69.1 acres and a 6,620 acre-foot storage capacity; (3) a 140-foot-high, 843.1-foot-long earth embankment dam creating; (4) a lower reservoir with a surface area of 39.7 acres and a 4,511 acre-foot storage capacity; (5) one 24-foot-diameter, 5,300-foot-long penstock; (6) a bifurcation to three 14-foot-diameter, and 50-foot-long penstocks; (7) a powerhouse/pumping station containing three pump/generating units with a total generating capacity of 390 megawatts; (8) a substation; (9) a 4.15-mile-long, 500 kV transmission line to an existing distribution line; and (10) a new 1,300-foot-long access road. The proposed project would have an average annual generation of 590,000,000 megawatt-hours (MWh), which would be sold to the Tennessee Valley Authority.

Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file competing applications:60 days from the issuance of this notice. Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing applications may be filed electronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web sitehttp://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system athttp://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp.You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support atFERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov;call toll-free at (866) 208-3676; or, for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659. Although the Commission strongly encourages electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file, mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426.

More information about this project, including a copy of the application, can be viewed or printed on the “eLibrary” link of the Commission's Web site athttp://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.Enter the docket number (P-14122-000) in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

On March 25, 2011, Reliable Storage 1 LLC, filed an application, pursuant to section 4(f) of the Federal Power Act, proposing to study the feasibility of hydropower near the town of Lake City, in Campbell County, Tennessee. The sole purpose of a preliminary permit, if issued, is to grant the permit holder priority to file a license application during the permit term. A preliminary permit does not authorize the permit holder to perform any land-disturbing activities or otherwise enter upon lands or waters owned by others without the owners' express permission.

The proposed pumped storage project would consist of the following: (1) A 10-foot-high, 12,100-foot-long roller compacted concrete ringed dike; (2) an upper reservoir with a surface area of 128.6 acres and an 7,914.4 acre-foot storage capacity; (3) a 180-foot-high, 1,248-foot-long earth embankment dam creating; (4) a lower reservoir with a surface area of 101 acres and an 7,594 acre-foot storage capacity; (5) one 24-foot-diameter, 5,300-foot-long penstock; (6) a bifurcation to three 14-foot-diameter, and 50-foot-long penstocks; (7) a powerhouse/pumping station containing three pump/generating units with a total generating capacity of 1,062 megawatts; (8) a substation; and (9) a 2.66-mile-long, 115 kV transmission line to an existing distribution line. The proposed project would have an average annual generation of 2,761,000,000 megawatt-hours (MWh), which would be sold to theTennessee Valley Authority.

Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, competing applications (without notices of intent), or notices of intent to file competing applications:60 days from the issuance of this notice. Competing applications and notices of intent must meet the requirements of 18 CFR 4.36. Comments, motions to intervene, notices of intent, and competing applications may be filedelectronically via the Internet. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web sitehttp://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp.Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters, without prior registration, using the eComment system athttp://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp.You must include your name and contact information at the end of your comments. For assistance, please contact FERC Online Support atFERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov;call toll-free at (866) 208-3676; or, for TTY, contact (202) 502-8659. Although the Commission strongly encourages electronic filing, documents may also be paper-filed. To paper-file, mail an original and seven copies to: Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE, Washington, DC 20426.

More information about this project, including a copy of the application, can be viewed or printed on the “eLibrary” link of the Commission's Web site athttp://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp.Enter the docket number (P-14125-000) in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.

Take notice that on July 11, 2011, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company (Tennessee Gas), 1001 Louisiana Street, Houston, Texas 77002, filed an application pursuant to Section 7(b), Parts 157.205, and 157.208, of the Commission's regulations under the Natural Gas Act (NGA) for authorization to increase the maximum allowable operating pressure (MAOP) of a seven-mile, four-inch lateral designated as the Tomball Lateral (“Line 21B-100”) in Harris County, Texas, and to thereafter operate Line 2B-100 up to the higher MAOP. Specifically, Tennessee Gas proposes to increase the MAOP of Line 2B-100 from 678 psig to 750 psig, all as more fully set forth in the application, which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the web athttp://www.ferc.govusing the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC atFERCOnlineSupport@ferc.govor call toll-free, (866) 208-3676 or TTY, (202) 502-8659.

Any person may, within 60 days after the issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene or notice of intervention. Any person filing to intervene or the Commission's staff may, pursuant to section 157.205 of the Commission's regulations under the NGA (18 CFR 157.205) file a protest to the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day after the time allowed for protest. If a protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for authorization pursuant to section 7 of the NGA.

The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests, and interventions via the internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site (http://www.ferc.gov) under the “e-Filing” link.

EPA is announcing the Meeting of the Mid-Atlantic/Northeast Visibility Union (MANE-VU) Executive Board. This meeting will deal with matters relative to Regional Haze, visibility improvement, and criteria pollutants within the MANE-VU region.

DATES:

The meeting will be held on September 15, 2011 starting at 9 a.m. (EDT).

MANE-VU's members include: Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, the Penobscot Indian Nation, the St. Regis Mohawk Tribe along with EPA and Federal Land Managers.

Type of Meeting:Open.

Agenda:Copies of the final agenda are available from the OTC office at (202) 508-3840; bye-mail: ozone@otcair.orgor via the MANE-VU Web site athttp://www.otcair.org/manevu/.

Notice is hereby given that the State of Alaska has revised its approved State Public Water Supply Supervision Primacy Program. Alaska has adopted regulations analogous to the EPA's Ground Water Rule. The EPA has determined that these revisions are no less stringent than the corresponding federal regulations. Therefore, the EPA intends to approve these State program revisions. By approving these rules, the EPA does not intend to affect the rights of federally recognized Indian tribes within “Indian country” as defined by 18 U.S.C. 1151, nor does it intend tolimit existing rights of the State of Alaska.

DATES:

All interested parties may request a public hearing. A request for a publichearing must be submitted by August 29, 2011 to the Regional Administrator at the EPA address shown below. Frivolous or insubstantial requests for a hearing may be denied by the Regional Administrator. However, if a substantial request for a public hearing is made by August 29, 2011, a public hearingwill be held. If no timely and appropriate request for a hearing is received and theRegional Administrator does not elect to hold a hearing on his own motion, thisdetermination shall become final and effective on August 29, 2011. Any request for a public hearing shall include the following information: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the individual, organization, or other entity requesting a hearing; (2) a brief statement of the requesting person's interest in the Regional Administrator's determination and a brief statement of the information that the requesting person intends to submit at such hearing; (3) the signature of the individual making the request, or, if the request is made on behalf of an organization or other entity, the signature of a responsible official of the organization or other entity.

ADDRESSES:

All documents relating to this determination are available for inspection between the hours of 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, at the following offices:

1.BCSB Bancorp, Inc.,Baltimore, Maryland, to become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of Baltimore County Savings Bank Federal Savings Bank, Baltimore, Maryland, upon its conversion to a state-chartered commercial bank.

In connection with this application, applicant has also applied to engage in lending activities, pursuant to section 225.28(b)(1) of Regulation Y.

Comments on this application must be received by August 11, 2011.

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 25, 2011.Robert deV. Frierson,Deputy Secretary of the Board.[FR Doc. 2011-19099 Filed 7-27-11; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 6210-01-PDEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICESReport and Recommendations on the Usefulness and Limitations of the Murine Local Lymph Node Assay for Potency Categorization of Chemicals Causing Allergic Contact Dermatitis in HumansAGENCY:

Division of the National Toxicology Program (DNTP), National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS), National Institutes of Health (NIH), HHS.

ACTION:

Availability of Report and Recommendations; Notice of Transmittal.

SUMMARY:

The NTP Interagency Center for the Evaluation of Alternative Test Methods (NICEATM) announces availability of an Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM) test method evaluation report (TMER) that includes recommendations on the usefulness and limitations of the local lymph node assay (LLNA) for categorizing the potency of substances with the potential to cause allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) as strong skin sensitizers. Strong skin sensitizers are substances considered to have a significant potential for causing ACD.

ICCVAM recommends that a specific potency criterion for positive results from ACD safety testing using the LLNA can be used to further categorize some chemicals and products as strong skin sensitizers. However, since this criterion only identified approximately half of strong human skin sensitizers, ICCVAM concluded that failure to meet this criterion cannot be used as the basis for determining that a substance is not a strong skin sensitizer. Therefore, the potency criterion should only be used in a screening approach where chemicals that meet the criterion could be categorized as strong skin sensitizers, but chemicals that do not meet the criterion would require additional testing or information to determine that they are not strong skin sensitizers.

The report and recommendations have been transmitted to Federal agencies for their review and response to ICCVAM in accordance with the provisions of the ICCVAMAuthorization Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 285l-2).

In 1999, ICCVAM evaluated the validation status of the LLNA as a stand-alone alternative test method to the guinea pig maximization test (GPMT) and the Buehler test (BT) for assessing the ACD hazard potential of products and chemicals (NIH Publication No. 99-4494;http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/methods/immunotox/llna_PeerPanel98.htm). Based on this evaluation, ICCVAM recommended the LLNA as a valid substitute for traditional guinea pig test methods for most testing situations. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) subsequently accepted the method as a valid substitute for the GPMT and BT. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) also adopted the LLNA as OECD Test Guideline 429 in 2002. Using the LLNA instead of guinea pig tests reduces and refines (decreases or eliminates pain and distress) animal use for ACD safety testing.

In 2007, the CPSC nominated several new versions and applications of the LLNA to ICCVAM for evaluation of their scientific validity for regulatory testing purposes (http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/methods/immunotox/llnadocs/CPSC_LLNA_nom.pdf). The nomination requested that ICCVAM assess (1) the validation status of the LLNA limit dose procedure (i.e.,the reduced LLNA); (2) the modified LLNA test method protocols that do not require the use of radioactive materials; (3) the use of the LLNA to test mixtures, aqueous solutions, and metals; and (4) the use of the LLNA as a stand-alone assay to determine ACD potency categories for hazard classification and labeling. NICEATM published aFederal Registernotice (72 FR 27815) requesting public comments on (1) The appropriateness and relative priority of the CPSC-nominated LLNA activities, (2) the nomination of scientists to serve on an international independent scientific peer review panel, and (3) the submission of data from LLNA testing that related to the CPSC-nominated LLNA activities as well as corresponding data from human and other animal studies. ICCVAM assigned these activities a high priority after considering comments from the public and endorsement from the Scientific Advisory Committee on Alternative Toxicological Methods (SACATM). NICEATM and ICCVAM compiled comprehensive draft background review documents (BRDs), released them for public comment in January 2008 (73 FR 1360), and convened a public meeting of the panel on March 4-6, 2008, to peer review the draft documents. The panel evaluated the information in the draft BRDs as to whether it supported draft ICCVAM recommendations for (1) Test method usefulness and limitations, (2) updated standardized test method protocols, and (3) proposed future studies. The panel considered public comments made at the meeting, as well as public comments submitted in advance of the meeting, before concluding their deliberations. The panel's report was made available in May 2008 (73 FR 29136) for public comment. The draft ICCVAM BRDs, draft ICCVAM test method recommendations, the panel's report, and all public comments were made available to SACATM for comment at its meeting on June 18-19, 2008 (73 FR 25754).

After considering the conclusions and recommendations of the panel, comments from SACATM, and public comments, ICCVAM forwarded final recommendations for the reduced LLNA (NIH Publication No. 09-6439;http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/methods/immunotox/LLNA-LD/TMER.htm), LLNA performance standards, and the updated LLNA test method protocol (NIH Publication No. 09-7357;http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/methods/immunotox/llna_PerfStds.htm) to Federal agencies in September 2009 (74 FR 50212). Agency responses are available on the NICEATM-ICCVAM Web site.

NICEATM subsequently obtained additional data and/or information and revised the draft BRDs for both the traditional and nonradioactive LLNA methods. ICCVAM released the revised draft BRDs and the revised draft ICCVAM test method recommendations to the public for comment and announced a second meeting of the panel (74 FR 8974). The panel reconvened in public session on April 28-29, 2009, to review the ICCVAM-revised draft documents and to finalize its conclusions and recommendations on the current validation status of the nonradioactive test methods and the expanded uses of the LLNA for pesticide formulations and other products. The panel's report was made available for public comment in June 2009 (74 FR 26242). The revised draft ICCVAM BRDs, revised draft ICCVAM test method recommendations, the panel's report, and all public comments were made available to SACATM for comment on June 25-26, 2009 (74 FR 19562).

After considering the conclusions and recommendations of the panel, comments from SACATM, and public comments, along with the recommendations of an OECD Expert Consultation on the LLNA convened in October and December 2009, ICCVAM finalized and forwarded test method recommendations on two nonradioactive versions of the LLNA, LLNA: 5-Bromo-2′-deoxyuridine-Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (BrdU-ELISA) (NIH Publication No. 10-7552;http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/methods/immunotox/llna-ELISA/TMER.htm) and LLNA: Daicel Adenosine Triphosphate (DA) (NIH Publication No. 10-7551;http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/methods/immunotox/llna-DA/TMER.htm), and expanded uses of the LLNA for pesticide formulations and other products (NIH Publication No. 10-7512;http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov/methods/immunotox/llna-app.htm) to Federal agencies in June 2010 (75 FR 37443). Agency responses to these ICCVAM test method recommendations are available on the NICEATM-ICCVAM Web site.

The ICCVAM TMER,Usefulness and Limitations of the Murine Local Lymph Node Assay for Potency Categorization of Chemicals Causing Allergic Contact Dermatitis in Humans(NIH Publication No. 11-7709), describes ICCVAM's recommendations for using LLNA test results to categorize the potency of some substances identified as having the potential to cause ACD in humans as strong skin sensitizers. Strong sensitizers are those substances considered to have a significant potential for causing hypersensitivity. ICCVAM recommends that a specific potency criterion for positive results from ACD safety testing using the LLNA can be used to further categorize some chemicals and products as strong skin sensitizers. However, since this criterion only identified approximately half of the strong human skin sensitizers tested, failure to meet this criterion cannot be used as the basis for determining that a substance is not a strong skin sensitizer. Therefore, the potency criterion should only be used in a screening approach where chemicals that meet the criterioncould be categorized as strong skin sensitizers, but chemicals that do not meet the criterion would require additional testing or information to determine that they are not strong skin sensitizers.

The ICCVAM evaluation found that only 52% of the strong human skin sensitizers in the validation database would be identified as strong skin sensitizers using the LLNA potency criterion in the 2009 United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS). Accordingly, chemicals that do not meet the criterion would require additional testing or information to determine that a substance is not a strong human skin sensitizer.

Background Information on ICCVAM, NICEATM, and SACATM

ICCVAM is an interagency committee composed of representatives from 15 Federal regulatory and research agencies that require, use, generate, or disseminate toxicological and safety testing information. ICCVAM conducts technical evaluations of new, revised, and alternative safety testing methods with regulatory applicability and promotes the scientific validation and regulatory acceptance of toxicological and safety testing methods that more accurately assess the safety and hazards of chemicals and products and that reduce, refine (decrease or eliminate pain and distress), or replace animal use. The ICCVAM Authorization Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 285l-3) established ICCVAM as a permanent interagency committee of the NIEHS under NICEATM. NICEATM administers ICCVAM, provides scientific and operational support for ICCVAM-related activities, and conducts independent validation studies to assess the usefulness and limitations of new, revised, and alternative test methods and strategies. NICEATM and ICCVAM welcome the public nomination of new, revised, and alternative test methods and strategies applicable to the needs of U.S. Federal agencies. Additional information about NICEATM and ICCVAM can be found on the NICEATM-ICCVAM Web site (http://iccvam.niehs.nih.gov).

SACATM was established in response to the ICCVAM Authorization Act [Section 285l-3(d)] and is composed of scientists from the public and private sectors (67 FR 11358). SACATM advises ICCVAM, NICEATM, and the Director of the NIEHS and NTP regarding statutorily mandated duties of ICCVAM and activities of NICEATM. SACATM provides advice on priorities and activities related to the development, validation, scientific review, regulatory acceptance, implementation, and national and international harmonization of new, revised, and alternative toxicological test methods. Additional information about SACATM, including the charter, roster, and records of past meetings, can be found athttp://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/go/167.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) publishes a list of information collection requests under review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). To request a copy of these requests, call the CDC Reports Clearance Officer at (404) 639-5960 or send an e-mail toomb@cdc.gov.Send written comments to CDC Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC, or by fax to (202) 395-5806. Written comments should be received within 30 days of this notice.

Proposed Project

National Survey of Primary Care Policies for Managing Patients with High Blood Pressure, High Cholesterol, or Diabetes—New—Division of Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention (DHDSP), National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (NCCDPHP), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Background and Brief Description

Cardiovascular disease is a leading cause of death and disability for men and women in the United States, among the most costly health problems facing our nation today, and among the most preventable. Risk factors for cardiovascular disease include high blood pressure and high cholesterol. Because over 50% of diabetics have high blood pressure, high cholesterol, or both conditions, the optimal systems to treat people with hypertension, high cholesterol, or diabetes are interrelated.

In 2005, CDC's Division for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention (DHDSP) began developing evaluation indicators that reflect evidence-based outcomes from policy, systems, and environmental changes related to heart disease and stroke prevention. However, many of the indicators for short-term policy and systems changes do not have readily available data sources. This is particularly true for outcomes related to health care systems changes.

In 2011, CDC proposes to conduct a new information collection, the National Survey of Primary Care Policies for Managing Patients with High Blood Pressure, High Cholesterol, or Diabetes (NSPCP). The survey will be targeted to practice managers of non-federally run primary care physician practices that include at least one family practitioner or at least one physician specializing in internal medicine. Respondents will be drawn from a nationally representative sample of physician practices. The NSPCP survey instrument will undergo cognitive testing before dissemination.

The Web-based NSPCP will collect information about physician practices' use of evidence-based systems, including multidisciplinary team approaches for chronic disease treatment, electronic health records (EHR) with features appropriate for treating patients with chronic disease (e.g.,clinical decision supports, patient registries), and patient follow-up mechanisms. A follow-up survey will be conducted two years after completion of the baseline NSPCP. Approximately 900 physicians will participate in each cycle of data collection (baseline and follow-up). On an annualized basis, approximately 600 physicians will participate in the NSPCP per year, and 1,333 practices will be screened for participation.

Information from both cycles of data collection will be compared to monitor changes in health systems and dissemination of health systems technology. Results will be used by primary care practices to inform their systems for managing patients with chronic conditions and to improve the quality of care delivered. Results will be used by CDC to improve technical assistance to public health partners.

OMB approval is requested for three years. Participation in the NSPCP is voluntary, and all responses will be de-identified. There are no costs to respondents other than their time. The total estimated annualized burden hours are 317.

Estimated Annualized Burden HoursType of respondentsForm nameNumber of respondentsNumber of responses per respondentAvg. burden per response

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) publishes a list of information collection requests under review by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). To request a copy of these requests, call the CDC Reports Clearance Officer at (404) 639-5960 or send an e-mail toomb@cdc.gov.Send written comments to CDC Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, Washington, DC 20503 or by fax to (202) 395-5806. Written comments should be received within 30 days of this notice.

Proposed Project

Tourette Syndrome National Education and Outreach Program—New—National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities (NCBDDD), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Background and Brief Description

This program will collect program evaluation data from participants of educational workshops and recipients of educational resources on Tourette Syndrome (TS) conducted by the Tourette Syndrome Association in a cooperative agreement with the CDC.

TS is an inherited, neurobiological movement disorder characterized by involuntary motor and vocal tics that typically manifest during childhood. The exact number of people with TS is unknown. Data from the National Survey of Children's Health 2007 resulted in an estimate that 3 out of every 1,000 U.S. children (about 148,000) 6 through 17 years of age had been diagnosed with TS. Higher prevalence estimates obtained from community studies likely mean that there are a significant number of individuals who have TS, but who have not been diagnosed. TS is three to four times more common among males than females.

It is estimated that tens of thousands or Americans with TS either go undiagnosed or the clinical care they do receive is inadequate. There is no known cure. The disorder may express itself with mild symptoms for some, and severe symptoms for others. Depending on the severity and duration, tic symptoms may also be diagnosed as chronic motor or vocal tic disorder, transient tic disorder, and tic disorder not otherwise specified. TS is associated with a high rate of co-morbid conditions.

There is a lack of accurate treatment information among the medical community as well as the general public, and a limited number of expert physicians—all resulting in significant under-diagnosis, misdiagnosis, and inadequate treatment with scant follow-up care. Children also meet with stigmaand inadequate responses in educational settings, limiting their educational and social success.

To address these issues, the Tourette Syndrome Association has developed educational workshops and materials to improve the recognition and awareness of TS diagnosis, treatment, co-occurring conditions, and quality of life for those impacted by TS. Health education programs have been developed for 3 groups of audiences: Health professionals, education professionals, and people with TS and their families. The format includes general education programs for the 3 groups, as well as two more in-depth medical training programs for physicians on TS and on the Comprehensive Behavioral Intervention for Tics (CBIT) treatment. In addition, a range of professional health education materials in various formats have been developed as educational resources and will be disseminated.

CDC requests OMB approval to collect program evaluation information from workshop participants and recipients of educational materials over a three-year period. Participants of the workshops and recipients of educational resources will be completing program evaluation forms to provide information on whether the workshop or resource met the educational goals. The information will be used to improve future workshops.

There are no costs to respondents other than their time. The total estimated annual burden hours are 277.

Description:The LIHEAP Quarterly Allocation Estimates, ACF Form-535 is a one-page form that is sent to 50 State grantees and to the District of Columbia. It is also sent to Tribal Government grantees that receive over $1 million annually for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). Grantees are asked to complete and submit the form in the 4th quarter of each year. The data collected on the form are grantees estimates of obligations they expect to make each quarter for the upcoming fiscal year for the LIHEAP program. This is the only method used to request anticipated distributions of the grantees LIHEAP funds. The information is used to develop apportionment requests to OMB and to make grant awards based on grantees anticipated needs. Information collected on this form is not available through any other Federal source. Submission of the form is voluntary.

Additional Information:Copies of the proposed collection may be obtained by writing to the Administration for Children and Families, Office of Administration, Office of Information Services, 370 L'Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington, DC 20447,Attn:ACF Reports Clearance Officer. All requests should be identified by the title of the information collection.E-mail address: infocollection@acf.hhs.gov.

OMB Comment:OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of information between 30 and 60 days after publication of this document in theFederal Register. Therefore, a comment is best assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication. Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be sent directly to the following:

Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project,Fax:202-395-7285,E-mail: OIRA_SUBMISSION@OMB.EOP.GOV, Attn:Desk Officer for the Administration for Children and Families.Robert Sargis,Reports Clearance, Officer.[FR Doc. 2011-19104 Filed 7-27-11; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4184-01-PDEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICESAdministration for Children and FamiliesSubmission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Title:Child Abuse Prevention Program.

OMB No.:0970-0155.

Description:The Program Instruction, prepared in response to the enactment of the Community-Based Grants for the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect (administratively known as the Community Based Child Abuse Prevention Program, (CBCAP), as set forth in Title II of Public Law 111-320, Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act Amendments of 2010, provides direction to the States and Territories to accomplish the purposes of (1) supporting community-based efforts to develop, operate, expand, enhance and coordinate initiatives, programs, and activities to prevent child abuse and neglect; (2) supporting the coordination of resources and activities to better strengthen and support families to reduce the likelihood of child abuse and neglect, and; (3) fostering an understanding, appreciation, and knowledge of diverse populations in order to effectively prevent child abuse and neglect. This Program Instruction contains information collection requirements that are found in Pub. L. 111-320 at sections 201; 202; 203; 205; 206; and pursuant to receiving a grant award. The information submitted will be used by the agency to ensure compliancewith the statute, complete the calculation of the grant award entitlement, and provide training and technical assistance to thegrantee.

Respondents:State Governments.

Annual Burden EstimatesInstrumentNumber of

respondents

Number of responses per respondentAverage burden hours per responseTotal burden hoursApplication521402,080Annual Report521241,248

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours:3,328.

Additional Information:Copies of the proposed collection may be obtainedby writing to the Administration for Children and Families,Office of Administration, Office of Information Services, 370L'Enfant Promenade, SW., Washington, DC 20447, Attn: ACFReports Clearance Officer. All requests should be identified bythe title of the information collection.E-mail address:infocollection@acf.hhs.gov.

OMB Comment:OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection ofinformation between 30 and 60 days after publication of thisdocument in theFederal Register. Therefore, a comment is bestassured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30days of publication. Written comments and recommendations forthe proposed information collection should be sent directly tothe following:

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in theFederal Registerconcerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This notice solicits comments on the recordkeeping requirements for substances prohibited for use in animal food or feed.

DATES:

Submit electronic or written comments on the collection of information by September 26, 2011.

ADDRESSES:

Submit electronic comments on the collection of information to:http://www.regulations.gov.Submit written comments on the collection of information to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. All comments should be identified with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in theFederal Registerconcerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection of information set forth in this document.

With respect to the following collection of information, FDA invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

Substances Prohibited From Use in Animal Food or Feed—21 CFR Part 589 (OMB Control Number 0910-0627)—(Extension)

The final rule on bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) (73 FR 22720, April 25, 2008) prohibits the use of certain cattle origin materials in the food or feed of all animals to help prevent the spread of BSE in U.S. cattle. BSE is a progressive and fatal neurological disorder of cattle that results from an unconventional transmissible agent. BSE belongs to the family of diseases known as transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs). All TSEs affect the central nervous system of infected animals. These measures will further strengthen existing safeguards against BSE.

589.2001 (c)(2)(vi) and (c)(3)(i)1751175203,500$59,500589.2001 (c)(2)(ii)50150201,00017,000589.2001 (c)(3)(i)(A)1751175264,55080,580Total9,050157,0801There are no capital costs associated with this collection of information.

The number of recordkeepers times the number of records per recordkeeper equals total annual records. Total annual records times average burden per recordkeeper equals total hours.

Description of Respondents for Reporting;The final rule on BSE (73 FR 22720) included a provision that exempts cattle materials prohibited in animal feed (CMPAF) from designated countries from the prohibition on its use in animal feed (21 CFR 589.2001(b)(1)(vi)). A foreign country seeking this designation will submit a written request to FDA that includes a variety of information about the countries' BSE status (21 CFR 589.2001(f)). FDA estimates that 10 countries could submit a request to FDA to be exempted from CMPAF restrictions.

FDA estimates the reporting burden for this information collection as follows:

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a proposed collection of information has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES:

Fax written comments on the collection of information by August 29, 2011.

ADDRESSES:

To ensure that comments on the information collection are received, OMB recommends that written comments be faxed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, Attn: FDA Desk Officer, FAX: 202-395-7285, or e-mailed tooira_submission@omb.eop.gov.All comments should be identified with the OMB control number 0910-0389. Also include the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

In compliance with 44 U.S.C. 3507, FDA has submitted the following proposed collection of information to OMB for review and clearance.

Guidance for Industry: Fast Track Drug Development Programs: Designation, Development, and Application Review—(OMB Control Number 0910-0389)—[Extension]

Section 112(a) of the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 (FDAMA) (Pub. L. 105-115) amended the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) by adding section 506 (21 U.S.C. 356). The section authorizes FDA to take appropriate action to facilitate the development and expedite the review of new drugs, including biological products, intended to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and that demonstrate a potential to address an unmet medical need. Under section 112(b) of FDAMA, FDA issued guidance to industry on fast track policies and procedures outlined in section 506 of the FD&C Act. The guidance discusses collections of information that are specified under section 506 of the FD&C Act, other sections of the Public Health Service Act (the PHS Act), or implementing regulations. The guidance describes three general areas involving collection of information: (1) Fast track designation requests, (2) premeeting packages, and (3) requests to submit portions of an application. Of these, fast track designation requests and premeeting packages, in support of receiving a fast track program benefit, provide for additional collections of information not covered elsewhere in statute or regulation. Information in support of fast track designation or fast track program benefits that has previously been submitted to the Agency, may, in some cases, be incorporated into the request by referring to the information rather than resubmitting it.

Under section 506(a)(1) of the FD&C Act, an applicant who seeks fast track designation is required to submit a request to the Agency showing that the product: (1) Is intended for a serious or life-threatening condition and (2) has the potential to address an unmet medical need. Mostly, the Agency expects that information to support a designation request will have been gathered under existing provisions of the FD&C Act, the PHS Act, or the implementing regulations. If such information has already been submitted to the Agency, the information may be summarized in the fast track designation request. The guidance recommends that a designation request include, where applicable, additional information not specified elsewhere by statute or regulation. For example, additional information may be needed to show that a product has the potential to address an unmet medical need where an approved therapy exists for the serious or life-threatening condition to be treated. Such information may include clinical data, published reports, summaries of data and reports, and a list of references. The amount of information and discussion in a designation request need not be voluminous, but it should be sufficient to permit a reviewer to assess whether the criteria for fast track designation have been met.

After the Agency makes a fast track designation, a sponsor or applicant may submit a premeeting package that may include additional information supporting a request to participate in certain fast track programs. The premeeting package serves as background information for the meeting and should support the intended objectives of the meeting. As with the request for fast track designation, the Agency expects that most sponsors or applicants will have gathered such information to meet existing requirements under the FD&C Act, the PHS Act, or implementing regulations. These may include descriptions of clinical safety and efficacy trials not conducted under an investigational new drug application (i.e.,foreign studies) and information to support a request for accelerated approval. If such information has already been submitted to FDA, the information may be summarized in the premeeting package. Consequently, FDA anticipates that the additional collection of information attributed solely to the guidance will be minimal.

Under section 506(c) of the FD&C Act, a sponsor must submit sufficient clinical data for the Agency to determine, after preliminary evaluation, that a fast track product may be effective. Section 506(c) also requires that an applicant provide a schedule for the submission of information necessary to make the application complete before FDA can commence its review. The guidance does not provide for any new collection of information regarding the submission of portions of an application that are not required under section 506(c) of the FD&C Act or any other provision of the FD&C Act. All forms referred to in the guidance have current OMB approval: FDA Forms 1571 (OMB control number 0910-0014), 356h (OMB control number 0910-0338), and 3397 (OMB control number 0910-0297).

Respondents to this information collection are sponsors and applicants who seek fast track designation under section 506 of the FD&C Act. The Agency estimates the total annual number of respondents submittingrequests for fast track designation to the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research and the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research is approximately 97, and the number of requests received is approximately 118 annually. FDA estimates that the number of hours needed to prepare a request for fast track designation is approximately 60 hours per request.

Not all requests for fast track designation may meet the statutory standard. Of the requests for fast track designation made per year, the Agency granted 77 requests from 64 respondents, and for each of these granted requests a premeeting package was submitted to the Agency. FDA estimates that the preparation hours are approximately 100 hours per premeeting package.

In theFederal Registerof April 13, 2011 (76 FR 20679), FDA published a 60-day notice requesting public comment on the proposed collection of information. No comments were received.

FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection of certain information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (the PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in theFederal Registerconcerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the notice. This notice solicits comments on the collection of information requirements relating to FDA's regulation of current good manufacturing practice (CGMP) and related regulations for blood and blood components; and requirements for donor testing, donor notification, and “lookback.”

DATES:

Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection of information by September 26, 2011.

ADDRESSES:

Submit electronic comments on the collection of information tohttp://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments on the collection of information to the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852. All comments should be identified with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document.

Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520), Federal Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor. “Collection of information” is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR 1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)) requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in theFederal Registerconcerning each proposed collection of information, including each proposed extension of an existing collection of information, before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection of information set forth in this document.

With respect to the following collection of information, FDA invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's functions, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents, including through the use of automated collection techniques, when appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

Current Good Manufacturing Practices and Related Regulations for Blood and Blood Components; and Requirements for Donor Testing, Donor Notification, and “Lookback” (OMB Control Number 0910-0116)—Extension

All blood and blood components introduced or delivered for introduction into interstate commerce are subject to section 351(a) of the Public Health Service Act (PHS Act) (42 U.S.C. 262). Section 351(a) of the PHS Act requires that manufacturers of biological products, which include blood and blood components intended for further manufacture into injectable products, have a license, issued upon a demonstration that the product is safe, pure, and potent and that the manufacturing establishment meets allapplicable standards, including those prescribed in the FDA regulations designed to ensure the continued safety, purity, and potency of the product. In addition, under section 361 of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 264), by delegation from the Secretary of Health and Human Services, FDA may make and enforce regulations necessary to prevent the introduction, transmission, or spread of communicable diseases from foreign countries into the States or possessions, or from one State or possession into any other State or possession.

Section 351(j) of the PHS Act states that the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) also applies to biological products. Blood and blood components for transfusion or for further manufacture into injectable products are drugs, as that term is defined in section 201(g)(1) of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 321(g)(1)). Because blood and blood components are drugs under the FD&C Act, blood and plasma establishments must comply with the substantive provisions and related regulatory scheme of the FD&C Act. For example, under section 501 of the FD&C Act (21 U.S.C. 351(a)), drugs are deemed “adulterated” if the methods used in their manufacturing, processing, packing, or holding do not conform to CGMP and related regulations.

The CGMP regulations (part 606 (21 CFR Part 606)) and related regulations implement FDA's statutory authority to ensure the safety, purity, and potency of blood and blood components. The public health objective in testing human blood donors for evidence of infection due to communicable disease agents and in notifying donors is to prevent the transmission of communicable disease. For example, the “lookback” requirements are intended to help ensure the continued safety of the blood supply by providing necessary information to users of blood and blood components and appropriate notification of recipients of transfusion who are at increased risk for transmitting human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) or hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection.

The information collection requirements in the CGMP, donor testing, donor notification, and “lookback” regulations provide FDA with the necessary information to perform its duty to ensure the safety, purity, and potency of blood and blood components. These requirements establish accountability and traceability in the processing and handling of blood and blood components and enable FDA to perform meaningful inspections.

The recordkeeping requirements serve preventive and remedial purposes. The disclosure requirements identify the various blood and blood components and important properties of the product, demonstrate that the CGMP requirements have been met, and facilitate the tracing of a product back to its original source. The reporting requirements inform FDA of certain information that may require immediate corrective action.

Under the reporting requirements, § 606.170(b), in brief, requires that facilities notify FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), as soon as possible after confirming a complication of blood collection or transfusion to be fatal. The collecting facility is to report donor fatalities, and the compatibility testing facility is to report recipient fatalities. The regulation also requires the reporting facility to submit a written report of the investigation within 7 days after the fatality. In fiscal year 2010, FDA received 76 of these reports.

Section 610.40(c)(1)(ii) (21 CFR 610.40(c)(1)(ii)), in brief, requires that each donation dedicated to a single identified recipient be labeled as required under § 606.121 and with a label containing the name and identifying information of the recipient.

Section 610.40(g)(2) requires an establishment to obtain written approval from FDA to ship human blood or blood components for further manufacturing use prior to completion of testing for evidence of infection due to certain communicable disease agents.

Section 610.40(h)(2)(ii)(A), in brief, requires an establishment to obtain written approval from FDA to use or ship human blood or blood components found to be reactive by a screening test for evidence of certain communicable disease agent(s) or collected from a donor with a record of a reactive screening test. Furthermore, § 610.40(h)(2)(ii)(C) and (h)(2)(ii)(D), in brief, require an establishment to label certain reactive human blood and blood components with the appropriate screening test results, and, if they are intended for further manufacturing use into injectable products, to include a statement on the label indicating the exempted use specifically approved by FDA. Finally, § 610.40(h)(2)(vi) requires each donation of human blood or blood components, excluding Source Plasma, that tests reactive by a screening test for syphilis and is determined to be a biological false positive to be labeled with both test results.

Section 610.42(a) (21 CFR 610.42(a)) requires a warning statement “indicating that the product was manufactured from a donation found to be reactive by a screening test for evidence of infection due to the identified communicable disease agent(s)” in the labeling for medical devices containing human blood or a blood component found to be reactive by a screening test for evidence of infection due to a communicable disease agent(s) or syphilis.

In brief, §§ 610.46 and 610.47 (21 CFR 610.46 and 610.47) require blood collecting establishments to establish, maintain, and follow an appropriate system for performing HIV and HCV prospective “lookback” when: (1) A donor tests reactive for evidence of HIV or HCV infection; or (2) the collecting establishment becomes aware of other reliable test results or information indicating evidence of HIV or HCV infection (“prospective lookback”) (see §§ 610.46(a)(1) and 610.47(a)(1)). The requirement for “an appropriate system” requires the collecting establishment to design standard operating procedures (SOPs) to identify and quarantine all blood and blood components previously collected from a donor who later tests reactive for evidence of HIV or HCV infection, or when the collecting establishment is made aware of other reliable test results or information indicating evidence of HIV or HCV infection. Within 3 calendar days of the donor testing reactive by an HIV or HCV screening test or the collecting establishment becoming aware of other reliable test results or information, the collecting establishment must, among other things, notify consignees to quarantine all identified previously collected in-date blood and blood components (§§ 610.46(a)(1)(ii)(B) and 610.47(a)(1)(ii)(B)) and, within 45 days, notify the consignees of supplemental test results, or the results of a reactive screening test if there is no available supplemental test that is approved for such use by FDA (§§ 610.46(a)(3) and 610.47(a)(3)).

Consignees also must establish, maintain, and follow an appropriate system for performing HIV and HCV “lookback” when notified by the collecting establishment that they have received blood and blood components previously collected from donors who later tested reactive for evidence of HIV or HCV infection, or when the collecting establishment is made aware of other reliable test results or information indicating evidence of HIV or HCV infection in a donor (§§ 610.46(b) and 610.47(b)). This provision for a system requires the consignee to establish SOPs for, among other things, notifying transfusion recipients of blood and blood components, or the recipient's physician of record or legalrepresentative, when such action is indicated by the results of the supplemental (additional, more specific) tests or a reactive screening test if there is no available supplemental test that is approved for such use by FDA, or if under an investigational new drug application (IND) or an investigational device exemption (IDE), is exempted for such use by FDA. The consignee must make reasonable attempts to perform the notification within 12 weeks of receipt of the supplemental test result or receipt of a reactive screening test result when there is no available supplemental test that is approved for such use by FDA, or if under an IND or IDE, is exempted for such use by FDA (§§ 610.46(b)(3) and 610.47(b)(3)).

Section 630.6(a) (21 CFR 630.6(a)) requires an establishment to make reasonable attempts to notify any donor who has been deferred as required by § 610.41 (21 CFR 610.41), or who has been determined not to be eligible as a donor. Section 630.6(d)(1) requires an establishment to provide certain information to the referring physician of an autologous donor who is deferred based on the results of tests as described in § 610.41.

Under the recordkeeping requirements, § 606.100(b), in brief, requires that written SOPs be maintained for all steps to be followed in the collection, processing, compatibility testing, storage, and distribution of blood and blood components used for transfusion and further manufacturing purposes. Section 606.100(c) requires the review of all records pertinent to the lot or unit of blood prior to release or distribution. Any unexplained discrepancy or the failure of a lot or unit of final product to meet any of its specifications must be thoroughly investigated, and the investigation, including conclusions and followup, must be recorded.

In brief, § 606.110(a) provides that the use of plateletpheresis and leukaphesis procedures to obtain a product for a specific recipient may be at variance with the additional standards for that specific product if, among other things, the physician certifies in writing that the donor's health permits plateletpheresis or leukapheresis. Section 606.110(b) requires establishments to request prior approval from CBER for plasmapheresis of donors who do not meet donor requirements. The information collection requirements for § 606.110(b) are approved under OMB control number 0910-0338 and, therefore, are not reflected in tables 1 and 2 of this document.

Section 606.151(e) requires that SOPs for compatibility testing include procedures to expedite transfusion in life-threatening emergencies; records of all such incidents must be maintained, including complete documentation justifying the emergency action, which must be signed by a physician.

So that each significant step in the collection, processing, compatibility testing, storage, and distribution of each unit of blood and blood components can be clearly traced, § 606.160 requires that legible and indelible contemporaneous records of each such step be made and maintained for no less than 10 years. Section 606.160(b)(1)(viii) requires records of the quarantine, notification, testing and disposition performed under the HIV and HCV “lookback” provisions. Furthermore, § 606.160(b)(1)(ix) requires a blood collection establishment to maintain records of notification of donors deferred or determined not to be eligible for donation, including appropriate followup. Section 606.160(b)(1)(xi) requires an establishment to maintain records of notification of the referring physician of a deferred autologous donor, including appropriate followup.

Section 606.165, in brief, requires that distribution and receipt records be maintained to facilitate recalls, if necessary.

Section 606.170(a) requires records to be maintained of any reports of complaints of adverse reactions arising as a result of blood collection or transfusion. Each such report must be thoroughly investigated, and a written report, including conclusions and followup, must be prepared and maintained. When an investigation concludes that the product caused the transfusion reaction, copies of all such written reports must be forwarded to and maintained by the manufacturer or collecting facility.

Section 610.40(g)(1) requires an establishment to appropriately document a medical emergency for the release of human blood or blood components prior to completion of required testing.

In addition to the CGMP regulations in part 606, there are regulations in part 640 (21 CFR Part 640) that require additional standards for certain blood and blood components as follows: Sections 640.3(a)(1), (a)(2), and (f); 640.4(a)(1) and (a)(2); 640.25(b)(4) and (c)(1); 640.27(b); 640.31(b); 640.33(b); 640.51(b); 640.53(b) and (c); 640.56(b) and (d); 640.61; 640.63(b)(3), (e)(1), and (e)(3); 640.65(b)(2); 640.66; 640.71(b)(1); 640.72; 640.73; and 640.76(a) and (b). The information collection requirements and estimated burdens for these regulations are included in the part 606 burden estimates, as described in tables 1 and 2 of this document.

Respondents to this collection of information are licensed and unlicensed blood establishments that collect blood and blood components, including Source Plasma and Source Leukocytes, inspected by FDA, and other transfusion services inspected by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). Based on information received from CBER's database systems, there are approximately 31 licensed Source Plasma establishments with multiple locations and approximately 1,675 registered blood collection establishments, for an estimated total of 1,706 establishments. Of these establishments, approximately 1,032 perform plateletpheresis and leukopheresis. These establishments annually collect approximately 38.3 million units of Whole Blood and blood components, including Source Plasma and Source Leukocytes, and are required to follow FDA “lookback” procedures. In addition, there are another 4,059 establishments that fall under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 (formerly referred to as facilities approved for Medicare reimbursement) that transfuse blood and blood components.

The following reporting and recordkeeping estimates are based on information provided by industry, CMS, and FDA experience. Based on information received from industry, we estimate that there are approximately 21 million donations of Source Plasma from approximately 2 million donors and approximately 17.3 million donations of Whole Blood, including approximately 261,000 (approximately 1.5 percent of 17.3 million) autologous donations, from approximately 10.9 million donors. Assuming each autologous donor makes an average of 2 donations, FDA estimates that there are approximately 130,500 autologous donors.

FDA estimates that approximately 5 percent (3,600 of the 72,000 donations that are donated specifically for the use of an identified recipient would be tested under the dedicated donors' testing provisions in § 610.40(c)(1)(ii)).

Under § 610.40(g)(2) and (h)(2)(ii)(A), Source Leukocytes, a licensed product that is used in the manufacture of interferon, which requires rapid preparation from blood, is currently shipped prior to completion of testing for evidence of certain communicable disease agents. Shipments of Source Leukocytes are pre-approved under a biologics license application and each shipment does not have to be reportedto the Agency. Based on information from CBER's database system, FDA receives less than one application per year from manufacturers of Source Leukocytes. However, for calculation purposes, we are estimating one application annually.

Under § 610.40(h)(2)(ii)(C) and (h)(2)(ii)(D), FDA estimates that each manufacturer would ship an estimated 1 unit of human blood or blood components per month (12 per year) that would require 2 labels; one as reactive for the appropriate screening test under § 610.40(h)(2)(ii)(C), and the other stating the exempted use specifically approved by FDA under § 610.40(h)(2)(ii)(D). According to CBER's database system, there are approximately 40 licensed manufacturers that ship known reactive human blood or blood components.

Based on information we received from industry, we estimate that approximately 18,000 donations: (1) Annually test reactive by a screening test for syphilis, (2) are determined to be biological false positives by additional testing, and (3) are labeled accordingly (§ 610.40(h)(2)(vi)).

Human blood or a blood component with a reactive screening test, as a component of a medical device, is an integral part of the medical device,e.g.,a positive control for an in vitro diagnostic testing kit. It is usual and customary business practice for manufacturers to include on the container label a warning statement that identifies the communicable disease agent. In addition, on the rare occasion when a human blood or blood component with a reactive screening test is the only component available for a medical device that does not require a reactive component, then a warning statement must be affixed to the medical device. To account for this rare occasion under § 610.42(a), we estimate that the warning statement would be necessary no more than once a year.

FDA estimates that approximately 3,500 repeat donors will test reactive on a screening test for HIV. We also estimate that an average of three components was made from each donation. Under § 610.46(a)(1)(ii)(B) and (a)(3), this estimate results in 10,500 (3,500 × 3) notifications of the HIV screening test results to consignees by collecting establishments for the purpose of quarantining affected blood and blood components, and another 10,500 (3,500 × 3) notifications to consignees of subsequent test results. We estimate an average of 10 minutes per notification of consignees.

We estimate that § 610.46(b)(3) will require 4,059 consignees to notify transfusion recipients, their legal representatives, or physicians of record an average of 0.35 times per year resulting in a total number of 1,755 (585 confirmed positive repeat donors × 3) notifications. Under § 610.46(b)(3), we also estimate 1 hour to accommodate the time to gather test results and records for each recipient and to accommodate multiple attempts to contact the recipient.

Furthermore, we estimate that approximately 7,800 repeat donors per year would test reactive for antibody to HCV. Under § 610.47(a)(1)(ii)(B) and (a)(3), collecting establishments would notify the consignee 2 times for each of the 23,400 (7,800 × 3 components) components prepared from these donations, once for quarantine purposes and again with additional HCV test results for a total of 46,800 notifications as an annual ongoing burden. Under § 610.47(b)(3), we estimate that approximately 4,059 consignees would notify approximately 2,050 recipients or their physicians of record annually. Finally, we estimate 1 hour to complete notification.

Based on industry estimates, roughly 13 percent of approximately 10 million potential donors (1.3 million donors) who come to donate annually are determined not to be eligible for donation prior to collection because of failure to satisfy eligibility criteria. It is the usual and customary business practice of approximately 1,675 blood collecting establishments to notify onsite and to explain why the donor is determined not to be suitable for donating. Based on such available information, we estimate that two-thirds (1,117) of the 1,675 blood collecting establishments provided onsite additional information and counseling to a donor determined not to be eligible for donation as usual and customary business practice. Consequently, we estimate that only one-third, or 558, approximately, blood collecting establishments would need to provide, under § 630.6(a), additional information and onsite counseling to the estimated 433,000 (one-third of approximately 1.3 million) ineligible donors.

It is estimated that another 4.5 percent of 10 million potential donors (450,000 donors) are deferred annually based on test results. We estimate that approximately 95 percent of the establishments that collect 99 percent of the blood and blood components notify donors who have reactive test results for HIV, Hepatitis B Virus (HBV), HCV, Human T-Lymphotropic Virus (HTLV), and syphilis as usual and customary business practice. Consequently, 5 percent of the 1,706 establishments (85) collecting 1 percent (4,500) of the deferred donors (450,000) would notify donors under § 630.6(a).

As part of usual and customary business practice, collecting establishments notify an autologous donor's referring physician of reactive test results obtained during the donation process required under § 630.6(d)(1). However, we estimate that approximately 5 percent of the 1,675 blood collection establishments (84) may not notify the referring physicians of the estimated 2 percent of 130,500 autologous donors with the initial reactive test results (2,610) as their usual and customary business practice.

The recordkeeping chart reflects the estimate that approximately 95 percent of the recordkeepers, which collect 99 percent of the blood supply, have developed SOPs as part of their customary and usual business practice. Establishments may minimize burdens associated with CGMP and related regulations by using model standards developed by industries' accreditation organizations. These accreditation organizations represent almost all registered blood establishments.

Under § 606.160(b)(1)(ix), we estimate the total annual records based on the approximately 1.3 million donors determined not to be eligible to donate and each of the estimated 1.75 million (1.3 million + 450,000) donors deferred based on reactive test results for evidence of infection because of communicable disease agents. Under § 606.160(b)(1)(xi), only the 1,675 registered blood establishments collect autologous donations and, therefore, are required to notify referring physicians. We estimate that 4.5 percent of the 130,500 autologous donors (5,872) will be deferred under § 610.41, which in turn will lead to the notification of their referring physicians.

FDA has concluded that the use of untested or incompletely tested but appropriately documented human blood or blood components in rare medical emergencies should not be prohibited. We estimate the recordkeeping under § 610.40(g)(1) to be minimal with one or fewer occurrences per year. The reporting of test results to the consignee in § 610.40(g) does not create a new burden for respondents because it is the usual and customary business practice or procedure to finish the testing and provide the results to the manufacturer responsible for labeling the blood products.

The hours per response and hours per record are based on estimates received from industry or FDA experience with similar recordkeeping or reporting requirements.

FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as follows:

Table 1—Estimated Annual Reporting Burden121 CFR sectionNumber of

respondents

Number of

responses per

respondent

Total annual

responses

Average burden per responseTotal hours606.170(a)52881.203460.5173606.170(b)276176201,520610.40(c)(1)(ii)1,7062.113,6000.08288610.40(g)(2)11111610.40(h)(2)(ii)(A)11111610.40(h)(2)(ii)(C) and (h)(2)(ii)(D)40124800.296610.40(h)(2)(vi)1,70610.5518,0000.081,440610.42(a)11111610.46(a)(1)(ii)(B)1,6756.2710,5000.171,785610.46(a)(3)1,6756.2710,5000.171,785610.46(b)(3)4,0590.431,75511,755610.47(a)(1)(ii)(B)1,67513.9723,4000.173,978610.47(a)(3)1,67513.9723,4000.173,978610.47(b)(3)4,0590.512,05012,050630.6(a)3558775.98433,0000.0834,640630.6(a)48552.944,5001.56,750630.6(d)(1)8431.072,61012,610Total62,8511There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.2The reporting requirement in § 640.73, which addresses the reporting of fatal donor reactions, is included in the estimate for § 606.170(b).3Notification of donors determined not to be eligible for donation based on failure to satisfy eligibility criteria.4Notification of donors deferred based on reactive test results for evidence of infection due to communicable disease agents.5Five percent of establishments that fall under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 that transfuse blood and components and FDA-registered blood establishments (0.05 × 4,059 + 1,706).Table 2—Estimated Annual Recordkeeping Burden121 CFR sectionNumber of recordkeepersNumber of records per recordkeeperTotal annual recordsAverage burden per recordkeepingTotal hours606.100(b)252881288246,912606.100(c)5288102,88012,880606.110(a)36521520.526606.151(e)5288123,4560.08276606.160452881,329.86383,0000.75287,250606.160(b)(1)(viii)HIV consignee notification1,67512.5421,0000.173,5704,0595.1721,0000.173,570HCV consignee notification1,67527.9446,8000.177,9564,05911.5346,8000.177,956HIV recipient notification4,0590.431,7550.17298HCV recipient notification4,0590.512,0500.17349606.160(b)(1)(ix)1,7061,025.791,750,0000.0587,500606.160(b)(1)(xi)1,6753.515,8720.05294606.16552881,329.86383,0000.0830,640606.170(a)5288123,45613,456610.40(g)(1)1,70611,7060.50853Total443,7861There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.2The recordkeeping requirements in §§ 640.3(a)(1), 640.4(a)(1), and 640.66, which address the maintenance of SOPs, are included in the estimate for § 606.100(b).3The recordkeeping requirements in § 640.27(b), which address the maintenance of donor health records for the plateletpheresis, are included in the estimate for § 606.110(a).4The recordkeeping requirements in §§ 640.3(a)(2) and (f); 640.4(a)(2); 640.25(b)(4) and (c)(1); 640.31(b); 640.33(b); 640.51(b); 640.53(b) and (c); 640.56(b) and (d); 640.61; 640.63(b)(3), (e)(1), and (e)(3); 640.65(b)(2); 640.71(b)(1); 640.72; and 640.76(a) and (b), which address the maintenance of various records, are included in the estimate for § 606.160.5Five percent of establishments that fall under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments of 1988 that transfuse blood and components and FDA-registered blood establishments (0.05 × 4,059 + 1,706).6Five percent of plateletpheresis and leukopheresis establishments (0.05 × 1,032).Dated: July 22, 2011.David Dorsey,Acting Deputy Commissioner for Policy, Planning and Budget.[FR Doc. 2011-19040 Filed 7-27-11; 8:45 am]BILLING CODE 4160-01-PDEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICESFood and Drug Administration[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0318]Determination That INVERSINE (Mecamylamine Hydrochloride) Tablet and Six Other Drug Products Were Not Withdrawn From Sale for Reasons of Safety or EffectivenessAGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION:

Notice.

SUMMARY:

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has determined that the seven drug products listed in this document were not withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness. This determination means that FDA will not begin procedures to withdraw approval of abbreviated new drug applications (ANDAs) that refer to these drug products, and it will allow FDA to continue to approve ANDAs that refer to the products as long as they meet relevant legal and regulatory requirements.

In 1984, Congress enacted the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (Pub. L. 98-417) (the 1984 amendments), which authorized the approval of duplicate versions of drug products approved under an ANDA procedure. ANDA applicants must, with certain exceptions, show that the drug for which they are seeking approval contains the same active ingredient in the same strength and dosage form as the “listed drug,” which is a version of the drug that was previously approved. ANDA applicants do not have to repeat the extensive clinical testing otherwise necessary to gain approval of a new drug application (NDA). The only clinical data required in an ANDA are data to show that the drug that is the subject of the ANDA is bioequivalent to the listed drug.

The 1984 amendments include what is now section 505(j)(7) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 355(j)(7)), which requires FDA to publish a list of all approved drugs. FDA publishes this list as part of the “Approved Drug Products With Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations,” which is generally known as the “Orange Book.” Under FDA regulations, a drug is withdrawn from the list if the Agency withdraws or suspends approval of the drug's NDA or ANDA for reasons of safety or effectiveness, or if FDA determines that the listed drug was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness (21 CFR 314.162).

Under § 314.161(a) (21 CFR 314.161(a)), the Agency must determine whether a listed drug was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness: (1) Before an ANDA that refers to that listed drug may be approved; (2) whenever a listed drug is voluntarily withdrawn from sale and ANDAs that refer to the listed drug have been approved; and (3) when a person petitions for such a determination under 21 CFR 10.25(a) and 10.30. Section 314.161(d) provides that if FDA determines that a listed drug was withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness, the Agency will initiate proceedings that could result in the withdrawal of approval of the ANDAs that refer to the listed drug.

FDA has become aware that the drug products listed in the table in this document are no longer being marketed. (As requested by the applicant, FDA withdrew approval of NDA 021039 for AGENERASE (amprenavir) Oral Solution in theFederal Registerof July 21, 2010 (75 FR 42455).)

FDA has reviewed its records and, under § 314.161, has determined that the drug products listed in this document were not withdrawn from sale for reasons of safety or effectiveness. Accordingly, the Agency will continue to list the drug products listed in this document in the “Discontinued Drug Product List” section of the Orange Book. The “Discontinued Drug Product List” identifies, among other items, drug products that have been discontinued from marketing for reasons other than safety or effectiveness.

Approved ANDAs that refer to the NDAs listed in this document are unaffected by the discontinued marketing of the products subject to those NDAs. Additional ANDAs that refer to these products may also be approved by the Agency if they comply with relevant legal and regulatory requirements. If FDA determines that labeling for these drug products should be revised to meet current standards, the Agency will advise ANDA applicants to submit such labeling.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing a public workshop regarding the approach of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) to addressing drug shortages. This public workshop is intended to provide information for, and to gain additional insight from, professional societies, patient advocates, industry, consumer groups, health care professionals, researchers, and other interested persons about the causes and impact of drug shortages, and possible strategies for preventing or mitigating drug shortages. The input from this public workshop will help in developing topics for further discussion with industry and professional societies, and other stakeholders and may help the Agency to better address drug shortage issues.

Date and Time:The public workshop will be held on September 26, 2011, from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.

Location:The public workshop will be held at 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 31, rm. 1503 B and C (Great Room), Silver Spring, MD 20993. Information regarding special accommodations due to a disability, visitor parking, and transportation may be accessed at:http://www.fda.gov/AdvisoryCommittees/default.htm;under the heading “Resources for You,” click on “White Oak Conference Center Parking and Transportation Information for FDA Advisory Committee Meetings.” Please note that visitors to the White Oak Campus must enter through Building 1. (http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WorkingatFDA/BuildingsandFacilities/WhiteOakCampusInformation/ucm241740.htm).

Registration:To register electronically, e-mail registration information (including name, title, firm name, address, telephone, and fax number) todsworkshop@fda.hhs.govby September 19, 2011. Persons without access to the Internet can call Christine Moser at 301-796-1300 or Lori Benner at 301-796-1300 to register. Registration is free for the public workshop. Seating will be available on a first-come, first-served basis. Persons needing a sign language interpreter or other special accommodations should notify Christine Moser or Lori Benner (see Contact) at least 7 days in advance.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

FDA is announcing a public workshop regarding CDER's current approach to addressing drug shortages. Given the increasing number of drug shortages and the attendant safety concerns for the public's health, it is important to discuss the causes of these shortages, as well as strategies to address them. This public workshop will focus on providing information and gaining perspective from professional societies, patient advocates, industry, consumer groups, health care professionals, researchers, and other interested persons. The following topics will be discussed:

• How CDER becomes aware of drug shortages,

• Reasons behind drug shortages,

• Determination of medically necessary products,

• CGMP (current good manufacturing practice) and other compliance issues,

• Actions taken when a drug shortage occurs, and

• Outcomes of mitigated drug shortages.

Additional discussion will include the public health impact of drug shortages and what measures can be taken to prevent the occurrence of a drug shortage. The Agency encourages professional societies, patient advocates, industry, consumer groups, health care professionals, researchers, and other interested persons to attend this public workshop.

Transcripts:Please be advised that as soon as a transcript is available, it will be accessible athttp://www.regulations.gov.It may be viewed at the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD. A transcript will also be available in either hardcopy or on CD-ROM, after submission of a Freedom of Information request. Written requests are to be sent to the Division of Freedom of Information (HFI-35), Office of Management Programs, Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rm. 6-30, Rockville, MD 20857.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is considering factors affecting the reprocessing of reusable medical devices, including reprocessing quality, device design as it relates to the reprocessing of reusable medical devices, reprocessing methodologies, validation methodologies, and health care facility best practices. This is part of an ongoing effort to address patient exposure to inadequately reprocessed reusable medical devices. FDA would like to provide another opportunity for public comment by establishing a docket to receive information and comments from the public on factors affecting the reprocessing of reusable medical devices.

DATES:

Submit either electronic or written comments by September 26, 2011.

ADDRESSES:

You may submit comments, identified with the FDA docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document, by any of the following methods:

Instructions:All submissions received must include the Agency name anddocket number for this notice. All comments received may be posted without change tohttp://www.regulations.gov,including any personal information provided. For additional information on submitting comments, see the “Comments” heading of theSUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATIONsection of this document.

Docket:For access to the docket to read background documents or comments received, go tohttp://www.regulations.govand insert the docket number, found in brackets in the heading of this document, into the “Search” box and follow the prompts and/or go to the Division of Dockets Management, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FDA has launched an effort focused on the reprocessing of reusable medical devices, including reprocessing quality, device design as it relates to the reprocessing of reusable medical devices, reprocessing methodologies, validation methodologies, and health care facility best practices. As part of this effort, FDA held a 2-day public workshop on June 8 and 9, 2011, at FDA's White Oak Conference Center in Silver Spring, MD. In theFederal Registerof May 2, 2011 (76 FR 24495), FDA announced the workshop and provided background information. The workshop focused on medical devices that are intended for reuse after reprocessing, rather than third-party reprocessing of single-use-only medical devices. FDA has a Web cast of the workshop available for viewing athttp://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/NewsEvents/WorkshopsConferences/ucm252205.htm.The workshop included a public comment session.

On the workshop Web site (http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/NewsEvents/WorkshopsConferences/ucm252205.htm), FDA stated that electronic comments regarding the public workshop could be submitted tohttp://www.regulations.govuntil June 29, 2011. FDA inadvertently failed to state this in the May 2, 2011, workshop notice. Hence,http://www.regulations.govwas not open for submission of electronic comments. FDA is publishing this notice to provide another opportunity for public comment on reprocessing of reusable medical devices issues.

Various types of medical devices used in health care settings, from surgical suction tips to complex endoscopes, are designed and labeled for use on multiple patients. Thousands of reusable medical devices requiring reprocessing are used every day in diagnosing and treating patients. FDA has received a number of reports of patient exposure to inadequately reprocessed medical devices and subsequent health care-associated infections (HAIs).

A definitive causal relationship between reusable device reprocessing and any patient infection is difficult to establish because inadequate reprocessing is not often investigated as a cause when an HAI is diagnosed. Several reports, however, contained evidence suggesting that inadequate reprocessing may have been a contributing factor in microbial transmission and subsequent infection. Ensuring adequate reprocessing of reusable medical devices could reduce the incidence of HAIs associated with the use of a reprocessed medical device. This will decrease the public health burden of HAIs in terms of morbidity, mortality, and cost.

The adequate reprocessing of reusable medical devices is a critically important factor in protecting patient safety. Inadequate reprocessing between patients can result in the retention of blood, tissue, and other biological debris (soil) in reusable medical devices. This soil can allow microbes to survive the high level disinfection or sterilization process, potentially resulting in HAIs or other adverse patient outcomes. FDA receives reports of problems in all steps of medical device reprocessing,1including cleaning, disinfecting, and sterilizing. Manufacturers, health care facilities, health care professionals, and FDA all have a role in reducing the risk of inadequately reprocessed medical devices. To help address these issues, FDA has engaged partners at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services, the Veterans Health Administration, and The Joint Commission, who bring valuable expertise in disease control and health care practices to this effort.

Interested persons may submit to the Division of Dockets Management (seeADDRESSES) either electronic or written comments regarding this document. It is only necessary to send one set of comments. It is no longer necessary to send two copies of mailed comments. Identify comments with the docket number found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.

To assist interested parties, we are asking for public comment on the following issues:

1. What are the nature, scope, and impact of reusable medical device reprocessing problems that have been observed? What are the causes of these problems?

2. What factors or criteria to facilitate reprocessing should be considered when designing reusable medical devices? How can the design process be improved to better incorporate cleanability as a design endpoint?

3. What factors or criteria should be considered when developing reprocessing instructions and validation protocols for devices to be used in various health care environments (e.g.,hospital, ambulatory surgical center, physician's office), based on the draft guidance document, “Processing/Reprocessing Medical Devices in Health Care Settings: Validation Methods and Labeling,” available athttp://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/ReprocessingofReusableMedicalDevices/default.htm?

4. What factors or criteria should be considered by a health care facility when developing reusable device reprocessing procedures and quality assurance processes?

5. How should problems with reusable medical device reprocessing be identified, reported, and acted upon by industry and users?

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has conducted a reorganization to modify its structure, to align similar functions under common executive leadership, and to reduce and change the reporting relationships to the Agency head. The reorganization creates four “directorates” within which most of FDA's activities will reside—Administrative operations, food and veterinary medicine, medical products and tobacco, and foreign and domestic regulatory operations. However, this restructuring will not change the basic form of FDA's programs, which will continue to reside in the Agency's seven operating Centers and the Office of Regulatory Affairs. It is intended to provide a more efficient span of control for executive leadership and to organize like activities together, not to change the essential programmatic activities under which FDA implements the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

Part D, Chapter D-B (Food and Drug Administration), Statement of Organization, Functions and Delegations of Authority for the Department of Health and Human Services (35 FR 3685, February 25, 1970, and 60 FR 56605, November 9, 1995, 64 FR 36361, July 6, 1999, 72 FR 50112, August 30, 2007, 74 FR 41713, August 18, 2009) is amended to reflect the restructuring of the Office of the Commissioner and other components, FDA that was approved by the Secretary of Health and Human Services on July 8, 2011 as follows. This reorganization is explained in Staff Manual Guide 1111.1, 1118.1, 1140.1, 1114.1, 1117.1, 1160.1, 1180.1, and 1115.1.

Under Part D, FDA, the Office of the Commissioner has been restructured as follows:

DA. ORGANIZATION—FDA is headed by the Commissioner of Food and Drugs (the Commissioner) and includes the following organizational units that report to the Commissioner:

Office of the CommissionerOffice of the Counselor to the CommissionerOffice of LegislationOffice of Policy and PlanningOffice of External AffairsOffice of the Chief ScientistOffice of OperationsOffice of FoodsOffice of Medical Products and TobaccoOffice of Global Regulatory Operations and PolicyOffice of Women's HealthOffice of Minority Health

The following organizations remain substantively unchanged: Center for Veterinary Medicine, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, Center for Tobacco Products, National Center for Toxicological Research, Office of Regulatory Affairs, Office of International Programs, and Office of Special Medical Programs.

However, some organizations will have different reporting relationships under the new organizational structure, as follows:

Office of the Commissioner

Headed by the Commissioner, the Office of the Commissioner will be comprised of the Office of the Counselor to the Commissioner, the Office of Legislation, the Office of Policy and Planning, the Office of External Affairs, the Office of the Chief Scientist, the Office of Women's Health, and the Office of Minority Health. Those offices will remain unchanged, with the exception of the realignment of functions of the Office of Budget from the Office of Policy, Planning and Budget (OPPB) to the Office of Operations, and the renaming of OPPB to the Office of Policy and Planning. The administrative functions that were formerly within the Office of the Commissioner will be relocated to the new Office of Operations. Although the National Center for Toxicological Research will remain unchanged as an operating Center, the Chief Scientist will assume direct line authority over the Center.

Office of Operations

Directed by a Chief Operating Officer (COO), the Office of Operations will assume the functions previously overseen by the Deputy Commissioner for Administration. The COO will, on behalf of the Commissioner, have Agency-wide authority for strengthening the management of business programs and operations of the Agency. The COO oversees day-to-day management issues, effective implementation of Congressional and Commissioner priorities and initiatives, and the delivery of quality services by the Agency and its Centers. Under this new structure, the COO will have direct line authority over the Office of Information Management, the Office of Management, the Office of Equal Employment Opportunity, and a new Office of Finance, Budget and Acquisition (which will receive the Office of Budget from the former Office of Policy, Planning and Budget). The Offices overseen by the COO were previously located within the Office of the Commissioner.

Office of Foods

This office, headed by a Deputy Commissioner for Foods is unchanged. The Center for Veterinary Medicine and Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition remain within this Office and are unchanged. This Deputy Commissioner will continue the goal established in the 2009 creation of this Office to integrate all of FDA's food-related functions into one seamless enterprise, as well as provide executive direction to the two Centers under the Deputy Commissioner's direction.

Office of Medical Products and Tobacco

This new Office will be comprised of four Centers that previously reported directly to the Commissioner—the Center for Devices and Radiological Health, the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, and the Center for Tobacco Products. Directed by the Deputy Commissioner for Medical Products and Tobacco, it will also oversee the Office of Special Medical Programs, which contains four Offices that were previously in the Office of the Commissioner (the Office of Orphan Product Development, the Office of Pediatric Therapeutics, the Office of Combination Products, and the Office of Good Clinical Practice). The newly created position of Deputy Commissioner for Medical Products and Tobacco will have direct line authority over the four medical product Centers and the special medical programs and, as such, will provide advice and counsel to the Commissioner on all FDA medical product and tobacco-related programs and issues. The Centers and special medical programs remain unchanged in this reorganization.

Office of Global Regulatory Operations and Policy

This new office, directed by a Deputy Commissioner for Global Regulatory Operations and Policy, will becomprised of two existing organizations that will otherwise remain unchanged—the Office of Regulatory Affairs and the Office of International Programs. In addition to exercising direct line authority over those two existing Offices, this new Deputy Commissioner will provide executive oversight, strategic leadership, and policy direction to FDA's domestic and international product quality and safety efforts, including global collaboration, global data-sharing, development and harmonization of standards, field operations, compliance, and enforcement activities.

II. Delegations of Authority

Pending further delegation, directives, or orders by the Commissioner, all delegations and redelegations of authority made to officials and employees of affected organizational components will continue in them or their successors pending further redelegations, provided they are consistent with this reorganization.

III. Electronic Access

Persons interested in seeing the complete Staff Manual Guide can find it on FDA's Web site at:http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/ReportsManualsForms/StaffManualGuides/default.htm

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing a public workshop to discuss measurement principles for clinical outcome assessments (COAs) for use in clinical trials for new drugs. COAs include patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures, clinician-reported outcome (ClinRO) measures, and observer-reported outcome (ObsRO) measures. This public workshop is intended to provide information for and gain perspectives from patient advocates, health care providers, researchers, regulators, individuals from academia, industry, and other interested persons on various aspects of the development and implementation of COAs in the evaluation of treatment benefit. Regulatory review issues regarding context of use and documentation of the measurement properties of a COA will be covered during panel discussions. The input from this public workshop will be published in the form of a white paper or a series of manuscripts.

DATES:

Date and Time:The public workshop will be held on October 19, 2011, from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Participants are encouraged to arrive early to ensure time for parking and routine security check before the workshop.

Location:The public workshop will be held at the FDA White Oak Campus, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Building 31 Conference Center, the Great Room (rm. 1503), Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Entrance for the public meeting participants (non-FDA employees) is through Building 1 where routine security check procedures will be performed. For parking and security information, please refer tohttp://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/WorkingatFDA/BuildingsandFacilities/WhiteOakCampusInformation/ucm241740.htm.Attendees are responsible for their own accommodations.

The public workshop will also be available to be viewed online via Web cast athttps://collaboration.fda.gov/coaworkshop/.Persons interested in participating by Web cast must register online by October 17, 2011.

Registration:Registration is free for the public workshop. Interested parties are encouraged to register early because space is limited to 150 attendees. Workshop space will be filled in order of receipt of registration. Those accepted into the workshop will receive confirmation. Registration will close after the workshop is filled. Registration at the site is not guaranteed but may be possible on a space available basis on the day of the public workshop beginning at 7:30 a.m.

If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please contact Shauna Shupe at least 7 days in advance.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) reviews COAs including PRO measures, (ClinRO) measures, and ObsRO measures when submitted with an investigational new drug application, a new drug application, or a biologics licensing application. The FDA guidance for industry entitled “Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling Claims,” available athttp://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM193282.pdf,explains how FDA reviews PRO measures.

CDER also reviews a COA when submitted for qualification as a drug development tool (DDT). Qualification of a COA is a regulatory determination that the COA is well-suited for a specific context of use in drug development. Following a public announcement of the qualification decision by FDA, the COA will be publicly available for use in any appropriate drug development program. Because the qualification process is separate from the drug marketing application process, qualification is conducive to public-private partnerships engaging in this COA development effort. Such collaborative approaches may increase the efficiency of COA development when more than one entity is interested in the use of a COA for a specific context of use. The FDA draft guidance for industry entitled “Qualification Process for Drug Development Tools,” available athttp://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM230597.pdf,provides the draft process for CDER participation in the consultation, advice, and qualification review for COAs and other DDTs.

This workshop will focus on FDA review principles specific to all type of COAs,i.e.,PRO, ClinRO, and ObsRO measures. More specifically, the workshop will provide researchers involved in the drug development process with information on the following topics concerning FDA review of COAs for treatment benefit evaluation:

• COA measurement principles;

• COA nomenclature;

• Determination of COA context of use;

• Practical considerations to develop and implement COAs to document treatment benefit; and

The Agency encourages patient advocates, health care providers, researchers, regulators, individuals from academia, industry, and other interested persons to attend this public workshop.

Transcripts:Please be advised that as soon as a transcript is available, it will be accessible athttp://www.regulations.gov.It may be viewed at the Division of Dockets Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20857. A transcript will also be available in either hardcopy or on CD-ROM, after submission of a Freedom of Information request. Written requests are to be sent to Division of Freedom of Information (ELEM-1029), Food and Drug Administration, 12420 Parklawn Dr., Element Bldg., Rockville, MD 20857. Transcripts will also be available on the Internet athttp://www.fda.gov/Drugs/NewsEvents/ucm206132.htmapproximately 45 days after the workshop.

The workshop helps to achieve objectives set forth in section 406 of the Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act of 1997 (21 U.S.C. 393) which includes working closely with stakeholders and maximizing the availability and clarity of information to stakeholders and the public. The workshop also is consistent with the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), as outreach activities by government Agencies to small businesses.

Statutory Authority:The Indian Health Service (IHS) is accepting applications for two limited competition cooperative agreements.

The IHS award includes the following three components, as described in this announcement: “Retained Tribal Shares of Line Item 128 of the IHS Tribal Shares Table” (Tribal Shares), “Health Care Policy Analysis and Review” and “Tribal Leaders Diabetes Committee” (TLDC). The IHS award is authorized under the Snyder Act, codified at 25 U.S.C. 13.

The CMS award, through IHS, includes the following component, as described in this announcement: “CMS”. The CMS award is authorized under section 1110 of the Social Security Act, codified at 42 U.S.C. 1310, via an Intra-Departmental Delegation of Authority from CMS to IHS dated April 15, 2011 (IDDA-11-92), to permit obligation of funding for CMS for analyses, research and studies to address the potential and actual impact of CMS programs on American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) beneficiaries and the health care system serving these beneficiaries.

IHS will be administering the CMS award pursuant to the Economy Act, codified at 31 U.S.C. 1535. It is the intention of IHS and CMS that one entity will receive both awards. CMS and IHS will concur on the final decision as to who will receive the CMS award. Each award is funded by each respective agency's appropriation. The awardee is responsible for accounting for each of the two awards separately and must provide two separate financial reports (one for each award), as indicated in Section VI. Award Administration Information, Number 4. Reporting Requirements, Item A. Progress Reports and Item B. Financial Reports of this announcement.

This program is described at 93.933 in the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA).

Background:Outreach and education programs (program) carry out health program objectives in the AI/AN community in the interest of improving Indian health care for all 565 Federally-recognized Tribes, including Tribal governments operating their own health care delivery systems through self-determination contracts with the IHS and Tribes that continue to receive health care directly from the IHS. This program addresses health policy and health programs issues and disseminates educational information to all AI/AN Tribes and villages. These awards require that public forums be held at Tribal educational consumer conferences to disseminate changes and updates in the latest health care information. These awards also require that regional and national meetings be coordinated for information dissemination as well as the inclusion of planning and technical assistance and health care recommendations on behalf of participating Tribes to ultimately inform IHS and CMS based on Tribal input through a broad based consumer network.

Purpose:The purpose of these awards is to further IHS and CMS missions and goals related to providing quality health care to the AI/AN community through outreach and education efforts with the sole outcome of improving Indian health care. The following health services components will be awarded:

Estimated Funds Available:The total amount of funding identified for fiscal year (FY) 2011 is approximately $1,250,000 to fund the two cooperative agreements for one year. $300,000 is estimated for outreach, education, and support to Tribes who have elected to leave their Tribal Shares with the IHS (this amount could vary based on Tribal Share assumptions; Tribal Shares funding will be awarded in partial increments based on availability and amount of funding); $100,000 for the Health Care Policy Analysis and Review; $250,000 associated with providing legislative education, outreach and communications support to the IHS TLDC and to facilitate Tribal consultation on the Special Diabetes Program for Indians (SDPI); and $600,000 for CMS. The awards under this announcementare subject to the availability of funds.

Anticipated Number of Awards:Two awards are anticipated as follows: One IHS award comprised of the following three components: Tribal Shares; HealthCare Policy Analysis and Review; and TLDC; and one CMS award comprised of the following component: CMS.

IHS Award

A. Tribal Shares portion of funding. Tribal Shares dollar amounts available for distribution to the awardee are determined each fiscal year by the IHS Office of Finance and Accounting;e.g.,estimated initial set-aside amount and final determination of remaining balances after Tribes and Tribal Organizations (T/TO) have either contracted or compacted Programs, Functions, Services, and Activities from IHS. FY 2011 is estimated at $300,000 total costs which may vary based on Tribal Shares assumption.

B. Health Care Policy Analysis and Review in the amount of $100,000.

C. TLDC in the amount of $250,000.

Project Period:August 15, 2011 with completion by August 14, 2012.

CMS Award

A. CMS in the amount of $600,000.

Project Period:August 15, 2011 with completion by August 14, 2012.

IHS Award Activities1. Tribal Shares Funding Is Utilized for Outreach, Education, and Support to Tribes

5. Coordinate planning and technical assistance needs on behalf of T/TO to IHS and CMS.

6. Convey health care recommendations on behalf of T/TO to IHS and CMS.

2. Health Care Policy Analysis and Review

This funding component requires the awardee to provide IHS with research and analysis of the impact of CMS programs on AI/AN beneficiaries and the health care delivery system that serves these beneficiaries. The awardee will perform in-depth health care policy analysis and review of issues related to CMS rules and regulations and the impact on IHS beneficiaries. This is to include, but not be limited to, a special emphasis and focus on the health care policy issues related to the special provisions for Indians in the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

The awardee will produce measurable outcomes to include:

1. Analytical reports, policy review and recommendation documents—The products will be in the form of written and/or electronic files that contain useful analysis relative to current and proposed health care policy and reform to be reported on a monthly or quarterly basis during the IHS and CMS teleconferences and face-to-face meetings with hard copies submitted to the Director, Office of Resource, Access and Partnerships, IHS.

2. Educational and informational materials to be disseminated by the awardee and communicated to IHS and Tribal health program staff during monthly and quarterly conferences, the Annual Consumer Conference, meetings and training sessions. This can be in the form of power point presentations, informational brochures, and/or handout materials.

3. TLDC and Related Support Activities

A. Coordination of travel and travel/per diem reimbursement of 12 TLDC members and five Technical Advisors to attend four quarterly TLDC meetings in accordance with the approved TLDC charter. Amount: $150,000.

Activities to be performed by the awardee include:

• Communicate directly with TLDC members (and alternates, as necessary) to arrange travel to TLDC meetings in accordance with the approved charter.

• Address and track all inquiries regarding travel arrangements and reimbursements for TLDC members and advisors (and alternates, as necessary) to attend planned TLDC meetings.

• Coordinate sharing of logistical information to TLDC members and advisors for meeting location and lodging with the IHS Division of Diabetes Treatment and Prevention (DDTP) contractor(s).

• Prepare and distribute reimbursement forms with clear instructions, in advance of the meeting and serve as the point of contact for communicating any additional travel information that is required.

• Establish a process to collect reimbursement forms from TLDC members and communicate this process to them.

• Establish and maintain a database on travel reimbursements and related meeting costs.

• Track and report all related travel and per diem costs.

• Coordinate and effect the timely reimbursement of approved participants' expenses within 30 days of the receipt of the claim forms.

• Maintain an active TLDC e-mail directory in order to assist the DDTP and the TLDC with broadcasting related meeting, travel and reimbursement information and soliciting related feedback.

• Include identified DDTP staff on all electronic correspondence to TLDC members.

B. Provide education, outreach and communications support to communicate with Tribal leaders and Indian organizations about the progress of the TLDC and the SDPI grant program. Amount: $70,000.

Activities to be performed by the awardee include:

• Gather and provide information on policy issues that are relevant to diabetes and related conditions in AI/ANs for the purpose of keeping TLDC membership up-to-date on such legislative information.

• Assist the TLDC with communication to Tribes, Tribal leaders, Indian organizations, and others about the success and outcomes of the SDPI and best practice information, to date.

• Coordinate sharing of TLDC information with national non-profit organizations such as the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation (JDRF) and the American Diabetes Association (ADA) for improving outreach to Tribes and Tribal communities as well as education and outreach to non-Indian communities in America about AI/ANs living with diabetes.

• Participate in the development of meeting agendas for face-to-face and conference call meetings under the direction of the TLDC and DDTP.

• Support the DDTP activities at mid-year meetings and the Annual Consumer Conference, which will include a plenary presentation on diabetes and up to four workshops through the payment of presenter fees, registration fees and exhibit fees.

• Support presentations that address diabetes and related chronic disease issues among AI/ANs at national Tribal health care conferences through payment of presenter fees and costs for no more than three separate trips.

• Address the findings in the report generated at the National Indian Health Board (NIHB)/IHS Obesity Prevention and Strategies in Native Youth Meeting held December 1, 2009 (contact DDTP for this report).

1. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) in the amount of $600,000.

CMS Research Projects

CMS is funding five research activities/projects for FY 2011 in the amount of $600,000, subject to the availability of funding.

The research projects are as follows:

(1)CMS Regulations/Initiatives Impact Analysis Project Objective: $200,000—Assess the impact of the ACA through an analysis of CMS regulations and CMS initiatives that have a potential impact or effect on IHS, Tribal and Urban (I/T/U) providers and AI/AN beneficiaries. The objective is to determine and monitor the level of AI/AN participation in the CMS regulatory process and assess whether such participation contributes to the understanding of how CMS-related provisions in the ACA impact the financing and delivery of health care in the Indian health care system. Specific tasks include:

• Submit to the CMS Tribal Technical Advisory Group (TTAG) a bi-weekly status report of regulations and policies reviewed and commented on; such status report shall include a brief summary of the regulation, and a concise description of the impact of the regulation on I/T/U providers and AI/AN beneficiaries.

• Prepare for the CMS Tribal Affairs Group/Office of Public Engagement quarterly reports and an annual report which summarizes the impacts of the ACA CMS-related regulations and initiatives on provision of health care in the I/T/U system and AI/AN beneficiaries.

• Refine understanding of current data collection and reporting requirements and capabilities of the Medicare system and develop proposals for additional data collection and/or coordination of current efforts to ensure that the data accurately reflects enrollment and utilization of program services, and propose system changes to improve analytic capabilities.

• Refine proposals for protocols that accurately reflect appropriate collection of ethnicity data on national basis.

• Develop research protocols to determine rates of racial misclassification in current Medicaid data, determine difference in rates of Medicaid enrollment and services utilization between Medicaid racially identified AI/ANs and IHS AI/AN Active Users and other recipients, and analyze determinants which may cause differences in Medicaid use and payments for Medicaid racially identified AI/ANs and IHS AI/AN Active Users and other recipients.

• Propose and analyze approaches necessary to change and augment data collection systems and other information needed to support all reporting required under the ACA, Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act (CHIPRA) and American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), and propose reporting mechanisms and protocols for such reporting.

(3)CMS Day and other Research Education Activities Project Objective: $100,000—Provide a national forum and educational opportunity for sharing the results of CMS-sponsored research and education and outreach efforts with Tribal leadership, Tribal program directors and staff, Tribal beneficiaries and IHS leadership and program staff to enhance information sharing between CMS and the Indian health care system. Specific tasks include:

• Within 30 business days after the effective date of the CMS cooperative agreement award, participate in a conference call or meeting with CMS and IHS to clarify the goals and objectives of a CMS Day during the Annual Consumer Conference and to discuss the agenda for CMS Day.

• Within ten business days after initial meeting, forward to the IHS and CMS Project Officers for approval a preliminary plan that includes methodology for surveying Tribes or other methodologies to determine the most appropriate ways to share CMS information and make use of CMS Day and a preliminary plan for meeting logistics.

• Collaborate with the TTAG throughout the planning phase to ensure their input is obtained on the agenda and other meeting developments.

• Make all necessary arrangements with the convention site to acquire and ensure ample conference rooms, audio-visual equipment, and appropriate room set-ups for this one day CMS meeting.

• Extend the invitation to any Tribal participants who are identified as part of the survey/information gathering process to determine who should participate in the CMS Day and the best methods for further information sharing.

• Meet periodically with CMS and IHS to discuss progress for the CMS Day and incorporate all changes recommended by the agencies.

• Provide periodic progress updates.

• Prepare the final draft CMS Day agenda that incorporates recommendations from CMS, IHS and the TTAG.

• Include up to 40 CMS staff and presenters to permit key staff to participate in the Conference and present on research findings and conduct outreach related activities on CMS Day.

• Develop and disseminate evaluation forms after each session to permit CMS, IHS and the TTAG to determine how to improve current practices and identify other areas where training is needed to determine other areas for research and outreach.

(4)Strategic Plan Development and Analysis Project Objective:$25,000—Revise and update the current TTAG Strategic Plan (currently for the years 2010-2015) to include recent new authorities in the ACA and other changes as they have developed through CHIPRA and ARRA. With the recent statutory authorization for a permanent TTAG, this plan reflects the commitment of CMS to ongoing input from the TTAG on the administration ofCMS programs in Indian Country. Specific tasks include:

• Revise and update the current strategic plan to include the years 2012-2018.

• Review objectives stated in the plan for current relevance and update and propose new objectives as appropriate in line with current program status.

• Review and propose new action steps in the plan as appropriate.

• Review and propose new budget categories and priorities to align the plan with the CMS budget process and funding mechanisms.

• Coordinate at least one in-person meeting of the Strategic Plan Subcommittee and conduct in-person interviews with CMS Baltimore headquarters staff as part of the process of updating objectives, action steps and budget alignment.

(5)Consultation Policy Development Project Objective: $25,000—Provide research support and approaches/options for the development of a CMS specific Tribal consultation policy. CMS currently does not have an agency specific policy and needs to develop a policy consonant with the recently revised HHS policy. Specific tasks include:

• Review the newly developed HHS policy for impact on individual agencies.

• Review the CMS draft plan developed in 2008 for consonance with the new HHS policy.

• Review all other currently approved HHS Operating Divisions' policies for potential impact and inclusion of approaches in a new CMS policy.

• Survey Tribal leadership for input on how to develop an effective CMS policy.

• Coordinate at least one in-person meeting of the Tribal Consultation Subcommittee and participate in in-person interviews with CMS Baltimore headquarters staff on specific areas such as budget and regulation development to ensure full understanding of all CMS perspectives.

• Prepare an options paper and specific language for all aspects of the proposed CMS Consultation policy.

Roles of Involvement:In accordance with the Federal Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act of 1977, two cooperative agreements will be awarded, as IHS and CMS will have substantial programmatic involvement as applicable with the awardee in carrying out each of the two awards as noted in the following delineated roles of involvement to further IHS and CMS health program objectives in the AI/AN community with outreach and education efforts in the interest of improving Indian health care.

Cooperative Agreements—Involvement of Parties:The awardee is responsible for the following in addition to fulfilling all requirements noted for each award component: Tribal Shares, Health Care Policy Analysis and Review, TLDC, and CMS:

(1) To facilitate a forum or forums where concerns can be heard that are representative of all Tribal Governments in the area of health care policy analysis and program development for each of the four components listed above;

(2) To assure that health care outreach and education is based on Tribal input through a broad-based consumer network involving the Area Indian Health Boards or Health Board Representatives from each of the twelve IHS Areas;

(3) To establish relationships with other national Indian organizations, with professional groups and with Federal, State and local entities supportive of AI/AN health programs;

(4) To improve and expand access for AI/AN Tribal Governments to all available programs within the HHS;

(5) To disseminate timely health care information to Tribal Governments, AI/AN Health Boards, other national Indian organizations, professional groups, Federal, State, and local entities;

(6) To provide an opportunity for Tribal Government officials to share their concerns, challenges, and recommendations for improving health care delivery through the IHS in forums designed to provide training, technical assistance and appropriate policy discussions; and

(7) To provide periodic dissemination of health care information, including publication of a newsletter four times a year that features articles on health promotion/disease prevention activities and models of best or improving practices, health policy and funding information relevant to AI/AN,etc.

Programmatic involvement of IHS staff in IHS and CMS awards:(IHS will be administering the CMS award pursuant to the Economy Act, codified at 31 U.S.C. 1535):

(1) The IHS assigned program official will work in partnership with the awardee in all decisions involving strategy, hiring of personnel, deployment of resources, release of public information materials, quality assurance, coordination of activities, any training, reports, budget and evaluation. Collaboration includes data analysis, interpretation of findings and reporting.

(2) The IHS assigned program official will monitor the overall progress of the awardee's execution of the requirements of the IHS award and the CMS award noted above, as well as their adherence to the terms and conditions of the cooperative agreements. This includes providing guidance for required reports, development of tools, and other products, interpreting program findings and assistance with evaluation and overcoming any slippages encountered.

(3) The IHS assigned program official will work closely with CMS and all participating IHS health services/programs as appropriate per their requirements noted in each of their respective sections.

(4) The IHS assigned program official will coordinate the following for CMS and the participating IHS program offices and staff:

• Discussion and release of any and all special grant conditions upon fulfillment.

• Monthly scheduled conference calls.

• Appropriate dissemination of required reports to each participating program.

(5) IHS will jointly with the awardee plan and set an agenda for the Annual Consumer Conference that:

(10) IHS will provide technical assistance to the awardee as requested.

(11) IHS staff may, at the request of the entity's board, participate on study groups, in board meetings, and may recommend topics for analysis and discussion.

III. Eligibility1. Eligible Applicants

Eligible applicants include 501(c)(3) non-profit entities who meet the following criteria:

Eligible entities must have demonstrated expertise in the following areas:

• Representing all Tribal governments and providing a variety of services to Tribes, Area Health Boards, Tribal organizations, and Federal agencies, and playing a major role in focusing attention on Indian health care needs, resulting in progress for Tribes.

• Promotion and support of Indian education, and coordinating efforts to inform AI/AN of Federal decisions that affect Tribal government interests including the improvement of Indian health care.

• National health policy and health programs administration.

• Have a national AI/AN constituency and clearly support critical services and activities within the IHS mission of improving the quality of health care for AI/AN people.

• Portray evidence of their solid support of improved healthcare in Indian Country.

IHS will be available to provide technical assistance to eligible applicants that meet the above criteria.

2. Limited Competition Announcement

This is a Limited Competition announcement. The funding levels noted include both direct and indirect costs. Applicant must address both projects. Applicants must provide a separate budget for each award and each budget may not exceed the maximum funding level from each agency. Limited competition refers to a funding opportunity that limits the eligibility to compete to more than one entity but less than all entities.

3. Other Required Information

(1)Cost Sharing or Matching—The IHS and CMS awards do not require matching funds or cost sharing.

(2)Other Requirements

• If the budgets submitted in the applications exceed the stated dollar amounts outlined within this announcement, the applications will not be considered for funding.

• Applications proposing other projects will be considered ineligible and will be returned to the applicant.

The application package and instructions may be located athttp://www.Grants.govorhttp://www.ihs.gov/NonMedicalPrograms/gogp/index.cfm?module=gogp_funding.

2. Content and Form of Application Submission

Mandatory documents for both the IHS award and the CMS award include:

• SF-424 Application for Federal Assistance.

• SF-424A Budget Information—Non-Construction Programs.

• SF-424B Assurances—Non-Construction Programs.

• Four separate budget narratives, one for each of the four components (not to exceed 2 single-spaced pages each). Four separate project narratives, one for each of the four components (not to exceed 10 single-spaced pages each)

○ E-mail confirmation from Federal Audit Clearinghouse (FAC) that audits were submitted; or

○ Face sheets from audit reports. These can be found on the FAC Web site.

Public Policy Requirements

All Federal-wide public policies apply to IHS grantees with the exception of the Discrimination policy. All guidelines provided in this announcement apply to both the IHS and CMS awards.

Requirements for Project and Budget Narratives

A.Project Narratives for each of the four components:This announcement is for two cooperative agreements; the narrative should be a separate Word document that is no longer than ten pages for each component: IHS will have 30 pages for three components and CMS will have ten pages for one component (see page limitations for each Part noted below) with consecutively numbered pages. Be sure to place all responses and required information in the correct section or they will not be considered or scored. If the narrative exceeds the page limits noted above, only the first 30 pages of the IHS submission and only the first ten pages of the CMS submission will be reviewed. There are three parts to the narrative: Part A—Program Information; Part B—Program Planning and Evaluation; and Part C—Program Report. See below for additional details about what must be included in the narrative:

Page Limitations for Narrative for Each of the Four Components Submission:

Part A: Program Information (2 page limitation)

Section 1: Needs

Part B: Program Planning and Evaluation (6 page limitation)

Section 1: Program Plans

Section 2: Program Evaluation

Part C: Program Report (2 page limitation)

Section 1: Describe major accomplishments over the last 24 months.

Section 2: Describe major activities over the last 24 months.

B.Narratives:A separate budget narrative is required for each component. Each narrative must describe the budget amount(s) requested and match the corresponding scopes of work described in the project narrative. The page limitation should not exceed six pages for the IHS submission and two pages for the CMS submission—two pages per each of the four health services/programs components described in this announcement.

3. Submission Dates and Times

Applications must be submitted electronically through Grants.gov by August 2, 2011 at 12 midnight Eastern Time (ET). Any application received after the application deadline will not be accepted for processing.

4. Intergovernmental Review

Executive Order 12372 requiring intergovernmental review is not applicable to this program.

5. Funding Restrictions

• Pre-award costs are not allowable.

• The available funds are inclusive of direct and appropriate indirect costs.

• Other Limitations—A current recipient cannot be awarded a new, renewal, or competing continuation grant for any of the following reasons:

—The current project is not progressing in a satisfactory manner;—The current project is not in compliance with program and financial reporting requirements; or—The applicant has an outstanding delinquent Federal debt. No award shall be made until either:

○ The delinquent account is paid in full; or

○ A negotiated repayment schedule is established and at least one payment is received.

6. Electronic Submission Requirements

Use thehttp://www.Grants.govWeb site to submit an application electronically and select the “FindGrant Opportunities” link on the homepage. Download a copy of the application package, complete it offline, and then upload and submit the application via the Grants.gov Web site. Electronic copies of the application may not be submitted as attachments to e-mail messages addressed to IHS employees or offices.

Applicants that receive a waiver of the requirement to submit electronic applications must follow the rules and timelines noted below when they submit a paper application. The applicant must request a waiver, if needed, at least ten days prior to the application deadline.

Applicants that do not adhere to the timelines for Central Contractor Registry (CCR) and/or Grants.gov registration and/or request timely assistance with technical issues will not be considered for a waiver to submit a paper application. Refer to the CCR Section below for further information.

Please be aware of the following:

• Please search for the application package in Grants.gov by entering the CFDA number or the Funding Opportunity Number. Both numbers are located in the header of this announcement.

• Applicants are strongly encouraged not to wait until the deadline date to begin the application process through Grants.gov as the registration process for CCR and Grants.gov could take up to fifteen working days.

• Please use the optional attachment feature in Grants.gov to attach additional documentation that may be requested by the Division of Grants Management (DGM).

• Page limitation requirements equally apply to paper and electronic applications. After you electronically submit your application, you will receive an automatic acknowledgment from Grants.gov that contains a Grants.gov tracking number. The DGM will download your application from Grants.gov and provide necessary copies to the appropriate agency officials. Neither the DGM nor the Office of Direct Service and Contracting Tribes (ODSCT) will notify applicants that the application has been received.

Technical Challenges

• If technical challenges arise and assistance is required with the electronic application process, contact Grants.gov Customer Support via e-mail atsupport@grants.govor at (800) 518-4726. Customer Support is available to address questions 24 hours a day, 7 days a week (except on Federal holidays). Upon contacting Grants.gov, obtain a tracking number as proof of contact. The tracking number is helpful if there are technical issues that cannot be resolved and waiver from the agency must be obtained.

• Waiver requests must be submitted in writing toGrantsPolicy@ihs.govwith a copy toTammy.Bagley@ihs.gov.Please include a clear justification for the need to deviate from our standard electronic submission process. If the waiver is approved, the application should be sent directly to the DGM by the deadline date of August 2, 2011. A copy of the approved waiver must be submitted along with the paper application that is mailed to the DGM (Refer to Section VII to obtain the mailing address). Paper applications that are submitted without a waiver will be returned to the applicant without review or further consideration. Late applications will not be accepted for processing or considered for funding and will be returned to the applicant.

Dun and Bradstreet (D&B) Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS)

All IHS applicants and grantee organizations are required to obtain a DUNS number and maintain an active registration in the CCR database. Additionally, all IHS grantees must notify potential first-tier subrecipients that no entity may receive a first-tier subaward unless the entity has provided its DUNS number to the prime grantee organization. These requirements will ensure use of a universal identifier to enhance the quality of information available to the public. Effective October 1, 2010, all HHS recipients were asked to start reporting information on subawards, as required by the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006, as amended (“Transparency Act”). The DUNS number is a unique nine-digit identification number provided by D&B, which uniquely identifies your entity. The DUNS number is site specific; therefore, each distinct performance site may be assigned a DUNS number. Obtaining a DUNS number is easy and there is no charge. To obtain a DUNS number, you may access it through the following Web sitehttp://fedgov.dnb.com/webformor to expedite the process, call (866) 705-5711.

Central Contractor Registry

Organizations that have not registered with CCR will need to obtain a DUNS number first and then access the CCR online registration through the CCR home page athttps://www.bpn.gov/ccr/default.aspx(U.S. organizations will also need to provide an Employer Identification Number from the Internal Revenue Service that may take an additional 2-5 weeks to become active). Completing and submitting the registration takes approximately one hour to complete and your CCR registration will take approximately 3-5 business days to process. Registration with the CCR is free of charge.

Additional information on implementing the Transparency Act, including the specific requirements for DUNS and CCR, can be found on the IHS DGM Web site:http://www.ihs.gov/NonMedicalPrograms/gogp/index.cfm?module=gogp_policy_topics.

V. Application Review/Information

Points will be assigned to each evaluation criteria adding up to a total of 100 points. A minimum score of 60 points is required for funding. Points are assigned as follows:

Evaluation CriteriaPart A: Program Information—Needs (15 points)Part B: Program Planning and EvaluationProgram Plans—(40 points)Program Evaluation—(20 points)Part C: Program Report (15 points)Budget Narratives (10 points)The instructions for preparing the application narrative also constitute the evaluation criteria for reviewing and scoring the application. Weights assigned to each section are noted in parentheses. Points will be assigned to each evaluation criteria adding up to a total of 100 points.Part A: Program InformationProject Narrative

A. Abstract—One page summarizing project (narrative).

B. Criteria.

(1) INTRODUCTION AND NEED FOR ASSISTANCE (15 points)

(a) Describe the organization's current health, education and technical assistance operations as related to the broad spectrum of health needs of the AI/AN community. Include what programs and services are currently provided (i.e.,Federally-funded, State-funded,etc.), any memorandums of agreement with other National, Area or local Indian health board organizations. This could also include HHS' agencies that rely on the applicant as the primary gateway organization that is capable of providing the dissemination of health information. Include information regarding technologies currently used (i.e.,hardware, software, services, Websites,etc.), and identify the source(s) of technical support for those technologies (i.e.,in-house staff, contractors, vendors,etc.). Include information regarding how long the applicant has been operating and its length of association/partnerships with Area health boards,etc.[historical collaboration].

(b) Describe the organization's current technical assistance ability. Include what programs and services are currently provided, programs and services projected to be provided, memorandums of agreement with other national Indian organizations that deem the applicant as the primary source of health policy information for AI/AN, memorandums of agreement with other Area Indian health boards,etc.

(c) Describe the population to be served by the proposed projects. Are they hard to reach? Are there barriers? Include a description of the number of Tribes who currently benefit from the technical assistance provided by the applicant.

(d) Describe the geographic location of the proposed projects including any geographic barriers experienced by the recipients of the technical assistance to the health care information provided.

(e) Identify all previous IHS cooperative agreement awards received, dates of funding and summaries of the projects' accomplishments. State how previous cooperative agreement funds facilitated education, training and technical assistance nation-wide for AI/ANs and relate the progression of health care information delivery and development relative to the current proposed projects. (Copies of reports will not be accepted.)

(f) Describe collaborative and supportive efforts with national, Area and local Indian health boards.

(g) Explain the need/reason for your proposed projects by identifying specific gaps or weaknesses in services or infrastructure that will be addressed by the proposed projects. Explain how these gaps/weaknesses were discovered. If the proposed projects include information technology (i.e.,hardware, software,etc.), provide further information regarding measures taken or to be taken that ensure the proposed projects will not create other gaps in services or infrastructure (i.e.,IHS interface capability, Government Performance Results Act reporting requirements, contract reporting requirements, Information Technology (IT) compatibility,etc.), if applicable.

(h) Describe the effect of the proposed projects on current programs (i.e.,Federally-funded, State-funded,etc.) and, if applicable, on current equipment (i.e.,hardware, software, services,etc.). Include the effect of the proposed projects on planned/anticipated programs and/or equipment.

(i) Describe how the projects relate to the purpose of the cooperative agreement by addressing the following: Identify how the proposed projects will address outreach and education regarding various health data listed,e.g.,Health Care Policy Analysis and Review, TLDC, and CMS,etc.,dissemination, training, and technical assistance.

Part B: Program Planning and EvaluationSection 1: Program Plans

(2) PROJECT OBJECTIVE(S), WORKPLAN AND CONSULTANTS (40 points)

(a) Identify the proposed objective(s) for each of the four projects, as applicable, addressing the following:

• Measurable and (if applicable) quantifiable.

• Results oriented.

• Time-limited.

Example:

Issue four quarterly newsletters, provide alerts and quantify number of contacts with Tribes.

Goals must be clear and concise. Objectives must be measurable, feasible and attainable for each of the selected projects.

(b) Address how the proposed projects will result in change or improvement in program operations or processes for each proposed project objective for all of the selected projects. Also address what tangible products, if any, are expected from the projects, (i.e.,legislative analysis, policy analysis, Annual Consumer Conference, mid-year conferences, summits,etc.).

(c) Address the extent to which the proposed projects will provide, improve, or expand services that address the need(s) of the target population. Include a strategic plan and business plan currently in place and that are being used that will include the expanded services. Include the plan(s) with the application submission.

(d) Submit a work plan in the appendix which includes the following information:

• Provide the action steps on a timeline for accomplishing each of the projects' proposed objective(s).

• Identify who will perform the action steps.

• Identify who will supervise the action steps.

• Identify what tangible products will be produced during and at the end of the proposed projects' objective(s).

• Identify who will accept and/or approve work products during the duration of the proposed projects and at the end of the proposed projects.

• Include any training that will take place during the proposed projects and who will be attending the training.

• Include evaluation activities planned in the work plans.

(e) If consultants or contractors will be used during the proposed project, please include the following information in their scope of work (or note if consultants/contractors will not be used):

• Educational requirements.

• Desired qualifications and work experience.

• Expected work products to be delivered on a timeline.

If a potential consultant/contractor has already been identified, please include a resume in the Appendix.

(f) Describe what updates will be required for the continued success of the proposed projects. Include when these updates are anticipated and where funds will come from to conduct the update and/or maintenance.

Section 2: Program EvaluationPROJECT EVALUATION (20 points)

Each proposed objective requires an evaluation component to assess its progression and ensure its completion. Also, include the evaluation activities in the work plan.

Describe the proposed plan to evaluate both outcomes and process. Outcome evaluation relates to the results identified in the objectives, and process evaluation relates to the work plan and activities of the project.

a. For outcome evaluation, describe:

• What will the criteria be for determining success of each objective?

• What data will be collected to determine whether the objective was met?

• At what intervals will data be collected?

• Who will collect the data and their qualifications?

• How will the data be analyzed?

• How will the results be used?

b. For process evaluation, describe:

• How will each project be monitored and assessed for potential problems and needed quality improvements?

• Who will be responsible for monitoring and managing each project's improvements based on results of ongoing process improvements and their qualifications?

• How will ongoing monitoring be used to improve the projects?

• Describe any products, such as manuals or policies, that might be developed and how they might lend themselves to replication by others.

• How will the organization document what is learned throughout each of the projects' periods?

c. Describe any evaluation efforts planned after the grant period has ended.

d. Describe the ultimate benefit to the AI/AN population that the applicant organization serves that will be derived from these projects.

Part C: Program ReportSection 1: Describe Major Accomplishments Over the Last 24 MonthsSection 2: Describe Major Activities Over the Last 24 MonthsORGANIZATIONAL CAPABILITIES AND QUALIFICATIONS (15 points)

This section outlines the broader capacity of the organization to complete the project outlined in the work plan. It includes the identification of personnel responsible for completing tasks and the chain of responsibility for successful completion of the projects outlined in the work plan.

(b) Describe the ability of the organization to manage the proposed projects. Include information regarding similarly sized projects in scope and financial assistance, as well as other cooperative agreements/grants and projects successfully completed.

(c) Describe what equipment (i.e., fax machine, phone, computer,etc.) and facility space (i.e., office space) will be available for use during the proposed projects. Include information about any equipment not currently available that will be purchased through the cooperative agreement/grant.

(d) List key personnel who will work on the projects. Include title used in the work plans. In the appendix, include position descriptions and resumes for all key personnel. Position descriptions should clearly describe each position and duties, indicating desired qualifications and experience requirements related to the proposed projects. Resumes must indicate that the proposed staff member is qualified to carry out the proposed projects' activities. If a position is to be filled, indicate that information on the proposed position description.

(e) If personnel are to be only partially funded by this cooperative agreement, indicate the percentage of time to be allocated to the projects and identify the resources used to fund the remainder of the individual's salary.

Budget Narratives:

CATEGORICAL BUDGET AND BUDGET JUSTIFICATION (10 points)

This section should provide a clear estimate of the projects' program costs and justification for expenses for the entire cooperative agreement periods. The budgets and budget justifications should be consistent with the tasks identified in the work plans. Because each of the two awards included in this announcement are funded through separate funding streams, the applicant must provide a separate budget and budget narrative for each of the four components and must account for costs separately.

(a) Provide a categorical budget for each of the 12-month budget periods requested for each of the four projects.

(b) If indirect costs are claimed, indicate and apply the current negotiated rate to the budget. Include a copy of the rate agreement in the appendix.

(c) Provide a narrative justification explaining why each line item is necessary/relevant to the proposed project. Include sufficient cost and other details to facilitate the determination of cost allowability (i.e.,equipment specifications,etc.).

Appendix Items

(1) Resolutions from Health Board of Directors (if applicable).

(2) Work plan for proposed objectives.

(3) Position descriptions for key staff.

(4) Resumes of key staff that reflect current duties.

(5) Consultant proposed scope of work (if applicable).

(6) Indirect Cost Rate Agreement (if applicable).

(7) Organizational chart.

Review and Selection Process

Each application will be prescreened by the DGM staff for eligibility and completeness as outlined in the funding announcement. Incomplete applications and applications that are non-responsive to the eligibility criteria may not be referred to the Objective Review Committee (ORC). Applicants will be notified by DGM, via e-mail or letter, to outline minor missing components (i.e.,signature on the SF-424, audit documentation, key contact form) needed for an otherwise complete application. All missing documents must be sent to DGM on or before the due date listed in the e-mail notification of missing documents required.

To obtain a minimum score for funding by the ORC, applicants must address all program requirements and provide all required documentation. Applicants that receive less than a minimum score will be considered to be “Disapproved” and will be informed via e-mail or regular mail by the ODSCT of their application's deficiencies. A summary statement outlining the strengths and weaknesses of the application will be provided to each disapproved applicant. The summary statement will be sent to the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) that is identified on the face page (SF424), of the application within 60 days of the completion of the Objective Review.

VI. Award Administration Information1. Award Notices

The Notice of Award (NoA) will be initiated by DGM and will be e-mailed or mailed via postal mail to the entity that is approved for funding under this announcement. The NoA will be signed by the Grants Management Officer as the authorizing document for which funds are disbursed to the approved entities. The NoA will serve as the official notification of the grant award and will reflect the amount of Federal funds awarded, the purpose of the grant, the terms and conditions of the award, the effective date of the award, and the budget/project period. The NoA is a legally binding document.

2. Administrative Requirements

Grants are administrated in accordance with the following regulations, policies, and OMB cost principles:

A. The criteria as outlined in this Announcement.

B. Administrative Regulations for Grants:

• 45 CFR part 92, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State, Local and Tribal Governments.

• 45 CFR part 74, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Awards and Subawards to Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and other Non-profit Organizations.

C. Grants Policy:

• HHS Grants Policy Statement, Revised 01/07.

D. Cost Principles:

• Title 2: Grant and Agreements, part 225-Cost Principles for State, Local, and Indian Tribal Governments (OMB Circular A-87).

This section applies to all grant recipients that request reimbursement of indirect costs in their grant application. In accordance with HHS Grants Policy Statement, part II-27, IHS requires applicants to obtain a current indirect cost rate agreement prior to award. The rate agreement must be prepared in accordance with the applicable cost principles and guidance as provided by the cognizant agency or office. A current rate covers the applicable grant activities under the current award's budget period. If the current rate is not on file with the DGM at the time of award, the indirect cost portion of the budget will be restricted. The restrictions remain in place until the current rate is provided to the DGM.

Generally, indirect costs rates for IHS grantees are negotiated with the Division of Cost Allocationhttp://rates.psc.gov/and the Department of Interior National Business Centerhttp://www.aqd.nbc.gov/services/ICS.aspx.If your organization has questions regarding the indirect cost policy, please call Mr. Andrew Diggs, DGM, at (301) 443-5204 to request assistance.

4. Reporting Requirements

The awardee must submit required reports consistent with the applicable deadlines. Failure to submit required reports within the time allowed may result in suspension or termination of an active grant, withholding of additional awards for the project, or other enforcement actions such as withholding of payments or converting to the reimbursement method of payment. Continued failure to submit required reports may result in one or both of the following: (1) The imposition of special award provisions; and (2) the non-funding or non-award of other eligible projects or activities. This requirement applies whether the delinquency is attributable to the failure of the grantee organization or the individual responsible for preparation of the reports. The reporting requirements for this program are noted below.

A. Progress Reports

Semi-annual progress report must be submitted within 30 days of the conclusion of the first six months of the budget period and a final within 90 days of the expiration of the budget period for each award. These reports will include a brief comparison of actual accomplishments to the goals established for the period, or, if applicable, provide sound justification for the lack of progress, and other pertinent information as required. Final reports must be submitted within 90 days of expiration of the budget/project periods. Separate progress reports are required for the IHS award and the CMS award.

B. Financial Reports

SF 425 Federal Financial Reports, Cash Transaction and Expenditure Reports are due 30 days after the close of every calendar quarter to the Division of Payment Management, HHS at:http://www.dpm.govfor each award. It is recommended that you also send a copy of your SF 425 reports to your Grants Management Specialists. Failure to submit timely reports may cause a disruption in timely payments to your organization. Separate financial reports are required for the IHS award and the CMS award. The awardee is responsible for accounting for each award separately.

Awardees are responsible and accountable for accurate information being reported on all required reports: the Progress Reports and Federal Financial Reports.

C. Federal Subaward Reporting System (FSRS)

These awards may be subject to the Transparency Act subaward and executive compensation reporting requirements of 2 CFR part 170. The Transparency Act requires OMB to establish a single searchable database, accessible to the public, with information on financial assistance awards made by Federal agencies. The Transparency Act also includes a requirement for recipients of Federal grants to report information about first-tier subawards and executive compensation under Federal assistance awards.

Effective October 1, 2010, IHS was instructed by HHS to implement a new Term and Condition into all new NoA, regarding the requirements for use and reporting of Federal subaward data. Although required to be referenced in all Funding Opportunity Announcements, this IHS Term of Award is applicable to all New (Type 1) IHS grants and cooperative agreement awards issued after October 1, 2010. Additionally, all IHS Renewal (Type 2) grant and cooperative agreement awards and Competing Revision awards (Competing T-3s) issued on or after October 1, 2010, may also be subject to the following award term. Further guidance on Renewal and Competing Revision award requirements to report subaward data is expected to be provided as it becomes available.

For the full IHS award term and condition implementing this requirement and additional award applicability information please visit the Grants Policy Web site at:http://www.ihs.gov/NonMedicalPrograms/gogp/index.cfm?module=gogp_policy_topics.

Telecommunication for the hearing impaired is available at: TTY (301) 443-6394.

The Public Health Service strongly encourages all grant and contract recipients to provide a smoke-free workplace and promote the non-use of all tobacco products. In addition, Public Law 103-227, the Pro-Children Act of 1994, prohibits smoking in certain facilities (or in some cases, any portion of the facility) in which regular or routine education, library, day care, health care or early childhood development services are provided to children. This is consistent with the HHS mission to protect and advance the physical and mental health of the American people.

Notice is hereby given that the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) will meet Thursday, August 11, 2011. The meeting will be held in the Plymouth Room of the Mayflower Park Hotel, 405 Olive Way, Seattle, WA 98101.

The ACHP was established by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470et seq.) to advise the President and Congress on national historic preservation policy and to comment upon Federal, federally assisted, and federally licensed undertakings having an effect upon properties listed in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. The ACHP's members are the Architect of the Capitol; the Secretaries of the Interior, Agriculture, Defense, Housing and Urban Development, Commerce, Education, Veterans Affairs, and Transportation; the Administrator of the General Services Administration; the Chairman of the National Trust for Historic Preservation; the President of the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers; a Governor; a Mayor; a Native American; and eight non-Federal members appointed by the President.

If you need special accommodations due to a disability, please contact the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Room 803, Washington, DC, 202-606-8503, at least seven (7) days prior to the meeting. For further information: Additional information concerning the meeting is available from the Executive Director, Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., #803, Washington, DC 20004.

Each year, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is required by the Write-Your-Own (WYO) Program Financial Assistance/Subsidy Arrangement (Arrangement) to notify private insurance companies (Companies) and to make available to the Companies the terms for subscription or re-subscription to the Arrangement. In keeping with that requirement, this notice provides the terms to the Companies to subscribe or re-subscribe to the Arrangement.

Under the Write-Your-Own (WYO) Program Financial Assistance/Subsidy Arrangement (Arrangement), 87 (as of July 1, 2011) private sector property insurers issue flood insurance policies and adjust flood insurance claims under their own names based on an Arrangement with the Federal Insurance Administration (FIA) published at 44 CFR Part 62, appendix A. The WYO insurers receive an expense allowance and remit the remaining premium to the Federal Government. The Federal Government also pays flood losses and pays loss adjustment expenses based on a fee schedule. In addition, under certain circumstances reimbursement for litigation costs, including court costs, attorney fees, judgments, and settlements, are paid by the FIA based on documentation submitted by the WYO insurers. The complete Arrangement is published in 44 CFR Part 62, appendix A. Each year, FEMA is required to publish in theFederal Registerand make available to the Companies the terms for subscription or re-subscription to the Arrangement.

There have been no changes to the Arrangement this year.

During August 2011, FEMA will send a copy of the offer for the FY2012 Arrangement, together with related materials and submission instructions, to all private insurance companies participating under the current FY2011 Arrangement. Any private insurance company not currently participating in the WYO Program but wishing to consider FEMA's offer for FY2012 may request a copy by writing: DHS/FEMA, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, Attn: Edward L. Connor, WYO Program, 1800 South Bell Street, Room 720, Arlington, VA 20598-3020, or contact Edward Connor at 202-646-3445 (facsimile), orEdward.Connor@dhs.gov(e-mail).

The proposed information collection requirement described below has been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act. The Department is soliciting public comments on the subject proposal.

Public Housing Agencies (PHAs) are responsible for contract administration to ensure that the work for project development is done in accordance with State laws and HUD requirements. The forms are prepared by a general contractor constructing a public housing development under the conventional bid method in order to establish theamount due from a PHA for work completed during the current month. The contractor/subcontractor reports provide details, and summaries of payments, change orders, and schedule of materials stored for the development. PHAs that have entered into an Annual Contributions Contract (ACC) with HUD must develop and keep on file the admissions and occupancy policies approved by HUD.

DATES:

Comments Due Date: August 29, 2011.

ADDRESSES:

Interested persons are invited to submit comments regarding this proposal. Comments should refer to the proposal by name and/or OMB approval Number (2577-0220) and should be sent to: HUD Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, Washington, DC 20503; e-mailOIRA-Submission@omb.eop.gov fax:202-395-5806.

This notice informs the public that the Department of Housing and Urban Development has submitted to OMB a request for approval of the Information collection described below. This notice is soliciting comments from members of the public and affecting agencies concerning the proposed collection of information to: (1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency, including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the proposed collection of information; (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those who are to respond; including through the use of appropriate automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting electronic submission of responses.

This Notice Also Lists the Following Information

Title of Proposal:Public Housing Admissions/Occupancy Policies.

OMB Approval Number:2577-0220.

Form Numbers:None.

Description of the Need for the Information and Its Proposed Use:Public Housing Agencies (PHAs) are responsible for contract administration to ensure that the work for project development is done in accordance with State laws and HUD requirements. The forms are prepared by a general contractor constructing a public housing development under the conventional bid method in order to establish the amount due from a PHA for work completed during the current month. The contractor/subcontractor reports provide details, and summaries of payments, change orders, and schedule of materials stored for the development. PHAs that have entered into an Annual Contributions Contract (ACC) with HUD must develop and keep on file the admissions and occupancy policies approved by HUD.

In accordance with Section 102(a)(4)(C) of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989, this announcement notifies the public of funding decisions made by the Department for funding under the FY 2010 HUD-VASH program. This announcement contains the consolidated names and addresses of those award recipients selected for funding under the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Michael Dennis, Director, Housing Voucher Programs, Office of Public and Indian Housing, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th Street, SW., Room 4228, Washington, DC 20410, telephone number 202-402-4059. For the hearing or speech impaired, this number may be accessed via TTY (text telephone) by calling the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339. (Other than the “800” TTY number, these telephone numbers are not toll-free.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The 2010 Appropriations Act (Pub. L. 111-117) made $75 million available for HUD-VASH, an initiative that combines HUD Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) rental assistance for homeless veterans with case management and clinical services provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) at its medical centers and in the community. The HCV program is authorized under section 8(o)(19) of the United States Housing Act of 1937. The 2010 Appropriations Act requires HUD to distribute assistance without competition, to public housing agencies (PHAs) that partner with eligible Veterans Affairs Medical Centers (VAMCs) or other entities as designated by the VA. As required by statute, selection was based on geographical need for such assistance as identified by the VA, public housing agency performance, and other factors as specified by HUD in consultation with the VA. On May 6, 2008 (73 FR 25026), HUD published in theFederal Registera notice that set forth the policies and procedures for the administration of tenant-based Section 8 HCV rental assistance under the HUD-VASH program administered by local PHAs that have partnered with local VA medical centers. TheFederal Registerpublished a correction of the May 6, 2008 notice on May 19, 2008 (73 FR 28863).

As required by the FY 2010 Appropriations Act, the VA identified VAMCs to participate in the program taking into account the population of homeless veterans needing services in the area, the number of homeless veterans recently served by the homeless programs at each VAMC, geographic distribution, and the VA's case management resources. After considering location and administrative performance of PHAs in the jurisdiction of each VAMC, HUD invited PHAs to apply for HUD-VASH vouchers. Of the $75 million appropriated in 2010, approximately $5.4 million was set-aside for project-basing of HUD-VASH vouchers. A HUD Notice, PIH 2010-40 (HA) that was issued on September 28, 2010, invited PHAs that had received a HUD-VASH allocation in FY 2008, 2009 or 2010 to apply for units from this set-aside. In accordance with Section 102(a)(4)(C) of the Department of Housing and Urban Development Reform Act of 1989 (103 Stat. 1987, 42 U.S.C. 3545), thisFederal Registerpublication lists in Appendix A the names, addresses, number of vouchers and amounts of the 207 PHAs to which awards were made under the FY2010 HUD-VASH initiative. Appendix B lists the names, addresses, number of vouchers and amounts awarded to 29 PHAs under the HUD-VASH set-aside.